ISSN 1347-5096

農学国際協力Volume 8

Volume 8

特集 第７回オープンフォーラム
アフリカにおける稲作振興の現状と今後の日本の役割−NERICAの研究と普及を例として−
Special Issue: The Seventh Open Forum on
Recent Progress in Rice Promotion in Africa and Role of Japan−NERICA as an example of research and dissemination−

名古屋大学農学国際教育協力研究センター
二〇一〇年二月

2010.2
名古屋大学農学国際教育協力研究センター
International Cooperation Center for Agricultural Education
Nagoya University

Nagoya University
International Cooperation Center for Agricultural Education
7TH ICCAE OPEN FORUM
October 20th, 2006, Nagoya University, Japanྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫᅜ㝿ᩍ⫱༠ຊ◊✲ࢭࣥࢱ࣮➨㸵ᅇ࣮࢜ࣉࣥࣇ࢛࣮࣒ࣛ

Recent Progress in Rice Promotion in Africa and Role of Japan
̿NERICA as an example of research and dissemination̿࢔ࣇࣜ࢝࡟࠾ࡅࡿ✄స᣺⯆ࡢ⌧≧࡜௒ᚋࡢ᪥ᮏࡢᙺ๭
̿NERICA ࡢ◊✲࡜ᬑཬࢆ౛࡜ࡋ࡚̿

Proceedings
Published byInternational Cooperation Center for Agricultural Education
Nagoya University
Japan

Nagoya University International Cooperation Center for Agricultural Education (ICCAE), one of the six
research centers for international cooperation in education in Japan, is the center dedicated to agricultural
education. ICCAE is aimed at being the leading center of international cooperation in agricultural
education, with the missions:1) as a national center, to contribute to human resource development for solving agricultural problems indeveloping countries;2) as an international center, to coordinate international cooperative projects with other institutions;
3) to establish human resource database for the purpose of coordinating effective international
cooperation; and4) to work for researches on agricultural cooperative projects aimed at achieving the well-being ofpeople in developing countries.

PROCEEDINGSThe proceedings included herein are the papers presented in the Seventh ICCAE Open Forum held in
October 20th, 2006 at Nagoya University, Japan.
Copyright©2006 by International Cooperation Center for Agricultural Education (ICCAE),
Nagoya University
Chikusa-ku 464-8601, Japan
Published by: International Cooperation Center for Agricultural Education (ICCAE)
Printed in Japan by: Nagoya University Co-op.

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8ᕳ 㢌 ゝ㎰Ꮫᅜ㝿༠ຊ➨ 8 ྕ䛿䚸ྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫᅜ㝿ᩍ⫱༠ຊ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊䠄௨ୗ䚸䛂㎰ᅜ䝉䞁䝍䞊䛃䠅
䛜䚸2006䠄ᖹᡂ 18䠅ᖺ 10 ᭶ 20 ᪥䛻䚸ྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ㔝౫グᛕᏛ⾡஺ὶ㤋䛷㛤ദ䛧䛯➨ 7 ᅇ䜸䞊䝥䞁䝣䜷䞊䝷䝮䛂䜰䝣䝸䜹䛻䛚䛡䜛✄స᣺⯆䛾⌧≧䛸௒ᚋ䛾᪥ᮏ䛾ᙺ๭NERICA 䛾◊✲䛸ᬑཬ䜢౛䛻䛧䛶䞊䠄7th ICCAE Open Forum: Recent Progress in Rice Promotion in Africa and Role of Japan–NERICA as an example of research and dissemination-䠅䛃䛾䝥䝻䝅䞊䝕䜱䞁䜾䛸䛧䛶䜎䛸䜑䛯䜒䛾䛷䛩䚹䛤ᢎ▱䛾䜘䛖䛻䚸ᡃ䛜ᅜ䛾䜰䝣䝸䜹䛾✄స᣺⯆䛻ྥ䛡䛶䛾༠ຊ䛿䚸2008 ᖺ 5 ᭶ᶓ὾䛷㛤ദ䛥䜜䛯➨ 4 ᅇᮾி䜰䝣䝸䜹㛤Ⓨ఍㆟䠄TICAD IV䠅䛷䚸ᅜ㝿༠ຊᶵᵓ䠄JICA䠅䛜䜰䝣䝸䜹⥳䛾㠉࿨䛾䛯䜑䛾
ྠ┕(AGRA)䛸ඹྠ䛷Ⓨ⾲䛧䛯䛂䜰䝣䝸䜹✄స᣺⯆䛾䛯䜑䛾ඹྠయ䠄CARD䠅䛃䛾䜲䝙䝅䜰䝔䜱䝤௨㝆䚸ᚑ๓䛻䜒䜎䛧䛶ᙉ໬䛥䜜䛶䛝䛶䛔䜎䛩䚹䜰䝣䝸䜹䛷䛾✄స᣺⯆䛻䛿䚸JICA 䛜ᚓព䛸䛩䜛ᢏ⾡ᬑཬ䜔ேᮦ⫱ᡂ➼䛻ຍ䛘䚸✄స◊✲䛚䜘䜃◊✲䜢㏻䛨䛯✄◊✲⪅䚸≉䛻䜰䝣䝸䜹ே◊✲⪅䛾⫱ᡂ䜒䜎䛯㔜せ䛷䛩䚹ඛ䛻㏙䜉䛯䜘䛖䛻䚸䛣䛣䛻཰㘓䛧䛯➨ 7 ᅇ䜸䞊䝥䞁䝣䜷䞊䝷䝮䛷䛾ሗ࿌䛿 3 ᖺ๓䛾䜒䛾䛷䛩䛜䚸䛭䛾ᚋ䛾䜰䝣䝸䜹✄స䛾≧ἣ䛾ኚ໬䜢㋃䜎䛘䜎䛧䛶䜒䚸ㄞ⪅䛾ⓙᵝ䛻䛸䛳䛶䛯䛔䜈䜣᭷⏝䛺᝟ሗ䜢ከ䛟ྵ䜣䛷䛔䜎䛩䚹ᮏྕ䛜䚸䜰䝣䝸䜹䛾✄స᣺⯆䛻⯆࿡䜔㛵ᚰ䜢䛚ᣢ䛱䛾ㄞ⪅䛻䛸䛹䜎䜙䛪䚸ᐇ㝿䛻ᅜ㝿༠ຊ䛻ᦠ䜟䛳䛶䛚䜙䜜䜛᪉䚻䚸䜎䛯ᵝ䚻䛺どⅬ䛛䜙䜰䝆䜰䜔䜰䝣䝸䜹䛾✄స◊✲䛻ᦠ䜟䛳䛶䛚䜙䜜䜛◊✲⪅䜔Ꮫ⏕䛾ⓙ䛥䜣➼䛾௒ᚋ䛾άື䛾ཧ⪃䛻䛺䜚䜎䛩䛸ᮃእ䛾႐䜃䛷䛤䛦䛔䜎䛩䚹᭱ᚋ䛻䚸3 ᖺ๓䛾䜸䞊䝥䞁䝣䜷䞊䝷䝮䛷䛤ㅮ₇䛔䛯䛰䛔䛯ⓙᵝ䛻ᑐ䛧䚸䝥䝻䝅䞊䝕䜱䞁䜾䛾ห⾜䛜㐜䜜䛯䛣䛸䜢῝䛟䛚ル䜃⏦䛧ୖ䛢䜎䛩䚹
2010䠄ᖹᡂ 22䠅ᖺ 2 ᭶ྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫᅜ㝿ᩍ⫱༠ຊ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊㛗
ᒣෆ㻌 ❶

iv
iv

Foreword

Foreword
This eighth volume of “International Cooperation in Agriculture” is published as the proceedingsof The Seventh ICCAE Open Forum held by International Cooperation Center for Agricultural
Education (ICCAE), Nagoya University.

ICCAE held the open forum at NOYORI Memorial

Conference Hall, Nagoya University on October 20, 2006, with the theme, “Recent Progress in Rice
Promotion in Africa and Role of Japan NERICA as an example of research and dissemination”.
Cooperation of Japan for the promotion of rice production in Africa has been increasingly
strengthened especially since the initiative of the Coalition for African Rice Development (CARD)
that was jointly announced by Alliance for a Green Revolution in Africa (AGRA) and Japan
International Cooperation Agency (JICA) in the Fourth Tokyo International Conference on African
Development (TICAD IV) in Yokohama, Japan, in May 2008.
For that purpose, in addition to the dissemination of technologies and human resource developmentthat are specialty of JICA, research on rice, and capacity development of researchers, especially
African researchers are quite important giving them chance to join the researches.
Even though the reports herein were given in the Seventh ICCAE Open Forum three years ago, andthe circumstances of rice production in Africa have been changed since then, we are confident that thereports will offer valuable pieces of information that are beneficial to all those who are concerned.
It is our great pleasure if this volume of “International Cooperation in Agriculture” would be usefulreference not only for those who are interested in rice promotion in Africa, but also for those who are
actively involved in the international cooperation activities as well as for researchers and students
working on rice production in Asia and Africa with various fields of expertise.
Finally, we have to express our sincere apology for the delay of this publication, to the speakers
who had given their precious presentations in the open forum three years ago.

Akira Yamauchi
Director
International Cooperation Center for Agricultural Education
Nagoya University
February, 2010v
vInternational Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8㛤఍䛾㎡㻌ྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫᅜ㝿ᩍ⫱༠ຊ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊䛿 㻝㻥㻥㻥 ᖺ䛾タ❧௨᮶䚸䜰䝆䜰䛸䛸䜒䛻䚸䜰䝣䝸䜹䛻䛚䛡䜛㎰Ꮫศ㔝䛾ၥ㢟䜢ᐇ㊶ⓗ䛻ゎỴ䛩䜛ே䛵䛟䜚༠ຊ䛻ຊ䜢ධ䜜䛶ྲྀ䜚⤌䜣䛷䛝䛶䛚䜚䜎䛩䚹ᙜ䝉䞁䝍䞊䛜䛣䛣ᩘᖺ䚸኱Ꮫ䜔 㻶㻵㻾㻯㻭㻿 䛺䛹ᅜෆ䛾◊✲ᶵ㛵䚸䛺䜙䜃䛻 㻭㻵㻯㻭㻰 䛺䛹䜰䝣䝸䜹䛾ᶵ㛵䛸㐃ᦠ䛧䛶ྲྀ䜚⤌䜣䛷䛔䜛 㻺㻱㻾㻵㻯㻭 ⡿䛾◊✲䛸ᬑཬ䛻䛛䛛䜟䜛ே䛵䛟䜚༠ຊ䛻㛵㐃䛧䛶䚸➨ 㻣 ᅇ䜸䞊䝥䞁䝣䜷䞊䝷䝮䛄䜰䝣䝸䜹䛻䛚䛡䜛✄స᣺⯆䛾⌧≧䛸௒ᚋ䛾᪥ᮏ䛾ᙺ๭㻌 䇷䝛䝸䜹䛾◊✲䛸ᬑཬ䜢౛䛸䛧䛶䇷䛅䛜 㻞㻜㻜㻢 ᖺ 㻝㻜 ᭶ 㻞㻜 ᪥䠄㔠䠅䚸ྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ㔝౫グᛕᏛ⾡஺ὶ㤋䛻䛚䛔䛶㛤ദ䛥䜜䜎䛧䛯䚹ᮏྕ䛿䛭䛾Ⓨ⾲䛸㆟ㄽ䛾ෆᐜ䜢䜎䛸䜑䛯䜒䛾䛷䛩䚹㻌
䝃䝤䝃䝝䝷䜰䝣䝸䜹䛾≉䛻㒔ᕷఫẸ䜔ⱝ⪅䜢୰ᚰ䛸䛩䜛⡿ᾘ㈝䛾ᛴ⃭䛺ቑຍ䜢ཷ䛡䚸ྛᅜ䛿㍺ධ౫
Ꮡ䛛䜙䛾⬺༷䛻ྥ䛡䛶⡿䛾ቑ⏘䛻ຊ䜢ධ䜜䛶䛝䛶䛔䜎䛩䚹ᡃ䛜ᅜ䜒 㻞㻜㻜㻟 ᖺ 㻥 ᭶䛻㛤ദ䛥䜜䛯➨ 㻟 ᅇ䜰䝣䝸䜹㛤Ⓨ఍㆟䠄㼀㻵㻯㻭㻰㻌㻵㻵㻵䠅䜢ዎᶵ䛸䛧䛶䚸㎰ᴗ⏕⏘ᛶ䛾ྥୖ䚸䜂䛔䛶䛿㣗ᩱ㍺ධ౫Ꮡ䛛䜙䛾⬺༷䛻ྥ䛡䛯ᅜ㝿༠ຊ䜢䛔䛳䛭䛖㔜ど䛧䚸䜰䝆䜰䛾✄䛸䜰䝣䝸䜹䛾✄䛾㛗ᡤ䜢⤌䜏ྜ䜟䛫䛯 㻺㻱㻾㻵㻯㻭 ⡿䛾◊✲䛸ᬑཬ䛻ຊ䜢ὀ䛔䛷䛔䜎䛩䚹㼀㻵㻯㻭㻰㻌㻵㻵㻵 䛛䜙䠏ᖺ䚸᪥ᮏே◊✲⪅䛻䜘䜚ྲྀ䜚⤌䜏䛾ᡂᯝ䜒ฟ䛶䛝䛴䛴䛒䜛䛺䛛䚸䝛䝸䜹⡿䛾◊✲䛸ᬑཬ䜢౛䛻䛧䛶䚸◊✲⪅䚸ᩍ⫱⪅䚸ᅜ㝿༠ຊ䛾ᑓ㛛ᐙ䛺䛹㛵ಀ⪅䛻ᮏ䝣䜷䞊䝷䝮䛻䛚㞟䜎䜚䛔䛯䛰䛝䚸䜰䝣䝸䜹䛻䛚䛡䜛✄స᣺⯆䛾⌧≧䜢ศᯒ䛧䚸௒ᚋ䛾᪥ᮏ䛾ᙺ๭䛻䛴䛔䛶άⓎ䛺㆟ㄽ䛜⾜䜟䜜䜎䛧䛯䚹㻌
ᙜ䝉䞁䝍䞊䛿 㻭㻵㻯㻭㻰 䛸 㻞㻜㻜㻞 ᖺ 㻟 ᭶䛻Ꮫ⾡஺ὶ༠ᐃ䜢⤖䜃䚸㻞㻜㻜㻠 ᖺ 㻟 ᭶䛻䜰䜽䝅䝵䞁䝥䝷䞁䜢⟇ᐃ䛧䚸㻭㻵㻯㻭㻰㻌 䛾୰ᚰ䝯䞁䝞䞊䚸䛺䜙䜃䛻኱Ꮫ䜔ヨ㦂◊✲ᶵ㛵䛾㛵ಀ⪅䜢ᣍ⪸䛧䛶䚸䜎䛯䝉䞁䝍䞊㛵ಀ⪅䛜㻭㻵㻯㻭㻰 䜢ゼၥ䛩䜛䛺䛹䛧䛶䚸㎰Ꮫ㡿ᇦ䛾ၥ㢟ゎỴ䛻䛒䛯䜛ே䛵䛟䜚༠ຊ䚸㻺㻱㻾㻵㻯㻭 ⡿䛾ඹྠ◊✲䜔ᬑཬᡓ␎ᵓ⠏䛾ᇶ┙ㄪᰝ䚸㻶㻵㻯㻭 䝥䝻䝆䜵䜽䝖䛾ホ౯䛺䛹䛻ྲྀ䜚⤌䜣䛷䛝䜎䛧䛯䚹➨ 㻣 ᅇ䜸䞊䝥䞁䝣䜷䞊䝷䝮䛜䚸䜰䝣䝸䜹䛻䛚䛡䜛✄స◊✲䛸ᬑཬ䛻ᑐ䛧䚸฿㐩Ⅼ䜢☜ㄆ䛧䚸௒ᚋ䛾Ⓨᒎ䛾᪉ྥ䛸ㄢ㢟䜢᫂☜໬䛩䜛䛣䛸䛻ᙺ❧䛴䛣䛸䛿ゝ䛖䜎䛷䜒䛒䜚䜎䛫䜣䚹㻌
ᇶㄪㅮ₇䜢㈷䜚䜎䛧䛯䝬䝉䝜኱Ꮫᩍᤵ䜸䝙䝱䞁䝂ඛ⏕䜢䛿䛨䜑䚸䛤ཧຍ䛔䛯䛰䛝䜎䛧䛯ⓙᵝ᪉䛻ᙜ䝉䞁䝍䞊䜢௦⾲䛧䛶ཌ䛟ᚚ♩⏦䛧ୖ䛢䜎䛩䚹䜎䛯䚸ᮏྕ䛜䚸ᙜ᪥䛤ཧຍ䛔䛯䛰䛡䛺䛛䛳䛯᪉䜒ྵ䜑䚸㻺㻱㻾㻵㻯㻭⡿䛾◊✲ᬑཬ䛺䛹䛻䛛䛛䜟䜛䜰䝣䝸䜹ே䛵䛟䜚༠ຊ䛾ྲྀ䜚⤌䜏䜢Ⓨᒎ䛥䛫䜛୍ຓ䛸䛺䜚䜎䛩䜘䛖ᚰ䜘䜚㢪䛳䛶䛚䜚䜎䛩䚹㻌

ྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫᅜ㝿ᩍ⫱༠ຊ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊㛗㻌䠄㻞㻜㻜㻢 ᖺ 㻝㻜 ᭶ᙜ᫬䠅㻌
➉㇂ ⿱அ

vi
vi

Opening Remarks

Opening Remarks
International Cooperation Center for Agricultural Education (ICCAE) of Nagoya University has been
putting great deal of effort since its establishment in 1999, into international cooperation in human resource
development as a practical solution to agricultural problems caused in African countries.

Over the past

few years, ICCAE has been engaging in capacity building cooperation activities concerning research anddissemination of NERICA (New Rice for Africa) a hybridized cultivar for favorable traits of both Asianrice Oryza sativa and African rice O. glaberrima, in cooperation with AICAD and concerned institutions in
Africa and Japanese organization JIRCAS.
The Seventh ICCAE Open Forum was held at Noyori Conference Hall of Nagoya University in October
20th, 2006 on the theme of 䇾Recent Progress in Rice Promotion in Africa and Role of Japan 䠉NERICA
as an example of research and dissemination䠉䇿.

The proceedings and discussion highlights of the forum

are published herein, as the eighth issue of “International Cooperation in Agriculture”.
Many African countries, particularly those in Sub-Saharan Africa, have been trying hard to increase
their rice production to counteract the rather drastic increase of consumption. Since the Third Tokyo
International Conference on African Development (TICAD III) in 2003, Japan has been promoting its
cooperative activities aimed at leading African countries out of food import dependency, and concentrating
on research and dissemination of NERICA.

With the progress of such activities achieved by Japanese

researchers in three years since TICAD III, ICCAE held this open forum as an occasion where we canevaluate and discuss the recent rice cropping situation in African countries.
ICCAE and AICAD have signed an academic exchange agreement in March 2002, and built its action
plan in March 2004. Under the agreement, ICCAE and AICAD have visited each other and worked on
their cooperative activities for agricultural capacity development such as joint researches on NERICA,
conducting basic survey for NERICA dissemination strategies, and evaluating the JICA projects.

The

Seventh ICCAE Open Forum must have been a fruitful occasion for confirming those achievements andclarifying the issues to be addressed and the directions we should go towards.
I would like to convey my acknowledgement on behalf of ICCAE, to those who participated in thisopen forum, especially to Professor Onyango from Maseno University, Kenya, for giving us the key note
address for this open forum.

I hope the discussions and proceedings included herein could promoteinternational cooperation in research and human resource development for disseminating NERICA.

Hiroyuki Takeya
Director
International Cooperation Center for Agricultural Education (ICCAE)
Nagoya University, Japan(as of October 2006)

vii
vii

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8ྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫᅜ㝿ᩍ⫱༠ຊ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊㻌➨䠓ᅇ䜸䞊䝥䞁䝣䜷䞊䝷䝮㻌䜰䝣䝸䜹䛻䛚䛡䜛✄స᣺⯆䛾⌧≧䛸௒ᚋ䛾᪥ᮏ䛾ᙺ๭㻌䇷㻺㻱㻾㻵㻯㻭 䛾◊✲䛸ᬑཬ䜢౛䛸䛧䛶䞊㻌䝃䝤䝃䝝䝷䜰䝣䝸䜹䛾≉䛻㒔ᕷఫẸ䜔ⱝ⪅䜢୰ᚰ䛸䛩䜛⡿ᾘ㈝䛾ᛴ⃭䛺ቑຍ䜢ཷ䛡䚸ྛᅜ䛿㍺ධ౫Ꮡ䛛䜙䛾⬺༷䛻ྥ䛡䛶⡿䛾ቑ⏘䛻ຊ䜢ධ䜜䛶䛝䛶䛔䜛䚹ᡃ䛜ᅜ䜒䚸㻞㻜㻜㻟 ᖺ 㻥 ᭶䛾➨ 㻟 ᅇ䜰䝣䝸䜹㛤Ⓨ఍㆟䠄㼀㻵㻯㻭㻰㻌㻵㻵㻵䠅๓ᚋ䜢ዎᶵ䛸䛧䛶䚸㎰ᴗ⏕⏘ᛶ䛾ྥୖ䚸䜂䛔䛶䛿㣗⣊㍺ධ౫Ꮡ䛛䜙䛾⬺༷䛻ྥ䛡䛯༠ຊ䜢୍ᒙ㔜ど䛧䚸䜰䝆䜰䛾✄䛸䜰䝣䝸䜹䛾✄䛾㛗ᡤ䜢⤌䜏ྜ䜟䛫䛯䝛䝸䜹⡿䛾◊✲䛸ᬑཬ䛻ຊ䜢ὀ䛔䛷䛔䜛䚹㻌㼀㻵㻯㻭㻰㻌 㻵㻵㻵 䛛䜙 㻟 ᖺ䚸᪥ᮏே◊✲⪅䛻䜘䜛ྲྀ䜚⤌䜏䛾ᡂᯝ䜒ฟ䛶䛝䛴䛴䛒䜛୰䚸䝛䝸䜹⡿䛾◊✲䛸ᬑཬ䜢౛䛻䛧䛶䚸䜰䝣䝸䜹䛻䛚䛡䜛✄స᣺⯆䛾⌧≧䜢ศᯒ䛧䚸௒ᚋ䛾᪥ᮏ䛾ᙺ๭䛻䛴䛔䛶㆟ㄽ䛩䜛䚹㻌᪥᫬䠖㻌 㻞㻜㻜㻢 ᖺ 㻝㻜 ᭶ 㻞㻜 ᪥䠄㔠䠅㻌 㛤఍㻌 㻥㻦㻜㻜㻌 㻌 㛢఍㻌 㻝㻣㻦㻜㻜㻌఍ሙ䠖㻌 ྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ㻌 㔝౫グᛕᏛ⾡஺ὶ㤋䠄ྡྂᒇᕷ༓✀༊୙⪁⏫䠅

Nagoya University
International Cooperation Center for Agricultural Education
The 7th ICCAE OPEN FORUM

Recent Progress in Rice Promotion in Africa and Role of Japan- NERICA as an example of research and dissemination Many African countries, particularly those in Sub-Saharan Africa, have been trying hard to promote their riceproduction in order to counteract the rather drastic increase of consumption by young people and city dwellers. Overthe past few years since the Third Tokyo International Conference on African Development (TICAD III) in 2003,
Japanese researchers including those who of ICCAE have promoted in international cooperative activities aimed athuman capacity development concerning the research on and dissemination of NERICA.
To confirm and evaluate the progress of such activities achieved by Japanese researchers in those three years,
ICCAE held this Seventh Open Forum as an occasion where such progress is reported and shared among the concerned
participants and the expected roles of Japan towards the future are discussed.

Date & Time:

Friday, October 20th, 2006, 9:30 to 17:00

Venue: NOYORI Memorial Conference Hall, Nagoya University
Chikusa-ku 464-8601, Nagoya, Japan

viii
viiiContents

Ⴘ ഏ
CONTENTSᡤᒓ䞉⫋఩䛿 2006 ᖺ 10 ᭶ 20 ᪥➨ 7 ᅇ ICCAE 䜸䞊䝥䞁䝣䜷䞊䝷䝮㛤ദᙜ᫬䚹ヲ⣽䛻䛴䛔䛶䛿ྛ䝥䝻䝣䜱䞊䝹䜢䛤ཧ↷ୗ䛥䛔䚹The authors’ affiliation and title are as of October 2006, at the time the 7th ICCAE Open Forum was held.
Please refer to the profile pages for their current affiliations and titles.

ᕳ㢌ゝ㻌㻲㼛㼞㼑㼣㼛㼞㼐 㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻌 㼕㼢ᒣෆ㻌 ❶㻌 㻌 Akira Yamauchiྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫᅜ㝿ᩍ⫱༠ຊ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊㛗䠄⌧⫋䠅
The Present Director, International Cooperation Center for Agricultural Education (ICCAE),
Nagoya University, Japan㛤఍䛾㎡㻌㻻㼜㼑㼚㼕㼚㼓㻌㻭㼐㼐㼞㼑㼟㼟 㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻌 㼢㼕➉㇂ ⿱அ㻌 㻌 Hiroyuki Takeyaྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫᅜ㝿ᩍ⫱༠ຊ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊㛗䠄๓௵䠅The Former Director, International Cooperation Center for Agricultural Education (ICCAE),
Nagoya University, JapanᇹᲫᇘ ؕᛦᜒ๫
CHAPTER 1 KEYNOTE ADDRESS䜰䝣䝸䜹䛻䛚䛡䜛⡿䛾⏕⏘䠖䝃䝝䝷௨༡䜰䝣䝸䜹䛾㣗ᩱᏳ඲ಖ㞀䜢ᙉ໬䛩䜛䛯䜑䛾䜻䞊㻌㻾㼕㼏㼑㻌㻼㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼕㼚㻌㻭㼒㼞㼕㼏㼍㻦㻌㻭㻌㻷㼑㼥㻌㼠㼛㻌㻼㼞㼛㼙㼛㼠㼕㼚㼓㻌㼠㼔㼑㻌㻿㼡㼎㻙㻿㼍㼔㼍㼞㼍㼚㻌㻭㼒㼞㼕㼏㼍㻌㻲㼛㼛㼐㻌㻿㼑㼏㼡㼞㼕㼠㼥㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚 㻌 㻟㻌䝆䝵䞁䞉䠟䞉䜸䝙䝱䞁䝂㻌 㻌 John C. Onyangoྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫᅜ㝿ᩍ⫱༠ຊ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊ᐈဨᩍᤵ䠄2006 ᖺ 10 ᭶ᙜ᫬䠅䝬䝉䝜኱Ꮫᩍᤵ䠄䜿䝙䜰䠅
Visiting Professor, ICCAE, Nagoya University, Japan (as of October 2006)
Professor, Maseno University, Kenya㉁␲ᛂ⟅ Questions and Answers㻌 㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻌 㻡㻞㻌䝥䝻䝣䜱䞊䝹 Profile㻌 㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻌 㻡㻠㻌

ix
ix

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8ᇹᲬᇘ ᄂᆮ
CHAPTER 2 RESEARCH᰿䛛䜙䜏䛯స≀䛾Ỉ䝇䝖䝺䝇⪏ᛶ㻌㻾㼛㼘㼑㼟㻌㼛㼒㻌㻾㼛㼛㼠㼟㻌㼕㼚㻌㻾㼑㼘㼍㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼠㼛㻌㼃㼍㼠㼑㼞㻌㻿㼠㼞㼑㼟㼟㻌㼀㼛㼘㼑㼞㼍㼚㼏㼑㻌㼛㼒㻌㻯㼞㼛㼜㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻌 㻡㻥㻌ᒣෆ㻌 ❶㻌 㻌 Akira Yamauchiྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ኱Ꮫ㝔⏕࿨㎰Ꮫ◊✲⛉ᩍᤵ
Professor, Graduate School of Bioagricultural Sciences, Nagoya University, Japan㉁␲ᛂ⟅ Questions and Answers㻌 㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻌 㻤㻡㻌䝥䝻䝣䜱䞊䝹 Profile㻌 㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻌 㻤㻣㻌䜟䛜ᅜ䛾䛣䜜䜎䛷 㻣㻣 ᖺ䛻䜟䛯䜛㝣✄⫱✀◊✲䛾ᡂᯝ㻌㻭㼏㼔㼕㼑㼢㼑㼙㼑㼚㼠㼟㻌㼛㼒㻌㼁㼜㼘㼍㼚㼐㻌㻾㼕㼏㼑㻌㻮㼞㼑㼑㼐㼕㼚㼓㻌㼕㼚㻌㻶㼍㼜㼍㼚㻌㼕㼚㻌㼠㼔㼑㻌㻼㼍㼟㼠㻌㻣㻣㻌㼅㼑㼍㼞㼟 㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻌 㻤㻥㻌▼஭ ༟ᮁ㻌 㻌 Takuro Ishii⊂❧⾜ᨻἲே㎰ᴗ䞉㣗ရ⏘ᴗᢏ⾡⥲ྜ◊✲ᶵᵓస≀◊✲ᡤ
Chief Researcher, National Institute of Crop Science (NICS)
National Agriculture and Food Research Organization (NARO) , Japan㉁␲ᛂ⟅ Questions and Answers㻌 㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚 㻌 㻝㻝㻤㻌䝥䝻䝣䜱䞊䝹 Profile㻌 㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚 㻌 㻝㻞㻝㻌䜿䝙䜰䛻䛚䛡䜛䝛䝸䜹⡿ᬑཬ䛻ලഛ䛩䜉䛝♫఍⤒῭ⓗせ⣲㻌㻿㼛㼏㼕㼛㼑㼏㼛㼚㼛㼙㼕㼏㻌㻲㼍㼏㼠㼛㼞㼟㻌㻺㼑㼑㼐㼑㼐㻌㼒㼛㼞㻌㻺㻱㻾㻵㻯㻭㻌㻰㼕㼟㼟㼑㼙㼕㼚㼍㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼕㼚㻌㻷㼑㼚㼥㼍㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚 㻌 㻝㻞㻟㻌㉁␲ᛂ⟅ Questions and Answers㻌 㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚 㻌 㻝㻠㻣㻌➉㇂ ⿱அ㻌 㻌 Hiroyuki Takeyaྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ኱Ꮫ㝔⏕࿨㎰Ꮫ◊✲⛉ᩍᤵ䠋㎰Ꮫᅜ㝿ᩍ⫱༠ຊ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊㛗䠄2006 ᖺ 10 ᭶ᙜ᫬䠅Director, International Cooperation Center for Agricultural Education (ICCAE)
Professor, Graduate School of Bioagricultural Sciences, Nagoya University, Japan (as of October 2006)
䝥䝻䝣䜱䞊䝹 Profile㻌 㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚 㻌 㻝㻡㻜㻌䝆䝵䝉䝣䞉䝙䝳䞊䝖䞁䞉O 䞉䜸䜿䝏㻌 㻌 Joseph Newton O. Okech䜿䝙䜰ᅜ❧㎰ᴗ◊✲ᡤ䜻䝪䝇䝉䞁䝍䞊 ♫఍⤒῭◊✲㒊㛗Professor, Graduate School of Bioagricultural Sciences, Nagoya University, Japan
Head, Socio Economics, Kenya Agricultural Research Institute (KARI) -Kibos Center, Kenya
䝥䝻䝣䜱䞊䝹 Profile㻌 㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻝㻡㻝㻌x
x

Contents䝃䝤䝃䝝䝷䜰䝣䝸䜹䛷䛿ఱᨾ⥳䛾㠉࿨䛾ᐇ⌧䛜㐜䜜䛯䛛䠛䠖㻌 Ỉ⏣௬ㄝ㻌 㻔㻝㻕㻌㼃㼔㼥㻌㼣㼍㼟㻌㼠㼔㼑㻌㻳㼞㼑㼑㼚㻌㻾㼑㼢㼛㼘㼡㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼚㼛㼠㻌㻿㼡㼏㼏㼑㼟㼟㼒㼡㼘㻌㼕㼚㻌㻿㼡㼎㻌㻿㼍㼔㼍㼞㼍㻌㻭㼒㼞㼕㼏㼍㻫㻦㻌 㻌 㻿㼍㼣㼍㼔㻌㻔㻿㼡㼕㼐㼑㼚㻕㻌㻴㼥㼜㼛㼠㼔㼑㼟㼕㼟㻌㻔㻝㻕㻌 㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻝㻡㻟㻌ⱝ᭶㻌 ฼அ㻌 㻌 Toshiyuki Wakatsuki㏆␥኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫ㒊ᩍᤵ
Professor, School of Agriculture, Kinki University, Japan㉁␲ᛂ⟅ Questions and Answers㻌 㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚 㻌 㻝㻥㻢㻌䝥䝻䝣䜱䞊䝹 Profile㻌 㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻝㻥㻥㻌す䜰䝣䝸䜹✄స䛾ᣑ኱䚸㞟⣙໬䚸ᣢ⥆ᛶ䠖㻌 䝁䞊䝖䝆䝪䝽䞊䝹䛸䜺䞊䝘䛾ኳỈప‵ᆅ✄స䛾౛㻌㻱㼤㼜㼍㼚㼟㼕㼛㼚㻘㻌㻵㼚㼠㼑㼚㼟㼕㼒㼕㼏㼍㼠㼕㼛㼚㻘㻌㼍㼚㼐㻌㻿㼡㼟㼠㼍㼕㼚㼍㼎㼕㼘㼕㼠㼥㻌㼛㼒㻌㻾㼕㼏㼑㻌㻼㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼕㼚㻌㼃㼑㼟㼠㻌㻭㼒㼞㼕㼏㼍㻦㻌㼀㼔㼑㻌㻯㼍㼟㼑㻌㼛㼒㻌㻾㼍㼕㼚㼒㼑㼐㻌㻸㼛㼣㼘㼍㼚㼐㻌㻾㼕㼏㼑㻌㼕㼚㻌㻯㽿㼠㼑㻌㼐䇻㻵㼢㼛㼕㼞㼑㻌㼍㼚㼐㻌㻳㼔㼍㼚㼍 㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻞㻜㻝㻌Ḉ஭ Ṋྖ㻌 㻌 㻌 Takeshi Sakurai㎰ᯘỈ⏘┬㎰ᯘỈ⏘ᨻ⟇◊✲ᡤ ୺௵◊✲ᐁ䠄2006 ᖺ 10 ᭶ᙜ᫬䠅
Senior Economist, Policy Research Institute, Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, Japan (as of
October 2006)㉁␲ᛂ⟅ Questions and Answers㻌 㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚 㻌 㻞㻟㻞㻌䝥䝻䝣䜱䞊䝹 Profile㻌 㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻞㻟㻡㻌ᇹᲭᇘ ǘƕ‫׎‬ƷӕǓኵǈ
CHAPTER 3 JAPAN’S ACTIVITIES䜰䝣䝸䜹ྥ䛡䜲䝛ရ✀䛾ᨵⰋ䜢┠ᣦ䛧䛯 㻶㻵㻾㻯㻭㻿 䛷䛾◊✲㛤Ⓨ㻌㻶㻵㻾㻯㻭㻿㻓㼟㻌㻾㼑㼟㼑㼍㼞㼏㼔㻌㻭㼏㼠㼕㼢㼕㼠㼕㼑㼟㻌㼀㼍㼞㼓㼑㼠㼕㼚㼓㻌㼍㼠㻌㻵㼙㼜㼞㼛㼢㼑㼙㼑㼚㼠㻌㼛㼒㻌㻾㼕㼏㼑㻌㼂㼍㼞㼕㼑㼠㼕㼑㼟㻌㼒㼛㼞㻌㻭㼒㼞㼕㼏㼍㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻞㻟㻥㻌⚄௦ 㝯㻌 㻌 Takashi Kumashiro⊂❧⾜ᨻἲேᅜ㝿㎰ᯘỈ⏘ᴗ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊䠄JIRCAS䠅 ⏕≀㈨※㡿ᇦ㛗
Director, Biological Resources Division, Japan International Research Center for Agricultural Sciences (JIRCAS)㉁␲ᛂ⟅ Questions and Answers㻌 㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚 㻌 㻞㻠㻡㻌䝥䝻䝣䜱䞊䝹 Profile㻌 㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻞㻠㻤㻌

xi
xi

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8㻶㻵㻯㻭 䛾䜰䝣䝸䜹䛻䛚䛡䜛䝛䝸䜹ᬑཬᨭ᥼㻌㻶㻵㻯㻭㻓㼟㻌㻺㻱㻾㻵㻯㻭㻌㻰㼕㼟㼟㼑㼙㼕㼚㼍㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼕㼚㻌㻭㼒㼞㼕㼏㼍 㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻞㻠㻥㻌ෆᓥ ගᏕ㻌 㻌 Mitsutaka Uchijima⊂❧⾜ᨻἲேᅜ㝿༠ຊᶵᵓ䠄JICA䠅㻌 ㎰ᮧ㛤Ⓨ㒊䠄2006 ᖺ 10 ᭶ᙜ᫬䠅
Project Management Officer, Central & West Africa Team, Rural Development Department (as of October2006), Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA)㉁␲ᛂ⟅ Questions and Answers㻌 㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚 㻌 㻞㻢㻠㻌䝥䝻䝣䜱䞊䝹 Profile㻌 㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻞㻢㻢㻌䜼䝙䜰䛸䜴䜺䞁䝎䛻䛚䛡䜛䝛䝸䜹✄ᬑཬάື䠖➲ᕝ䜾䝻䞊䝞䝹 㻞㻜㻜㻜 䛾⤒㦂䛛䜙㻌㻺㻱㻾㻵㻯㻭㻌㻰㼕㼟㼟㼑㼙㼕㼚㼍㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㻭㼏㼠㼕㼢㼕㼠㼕㼑㼟㻌㼕㼚㻌㻳㼡㼕㼚㼑㼍㻌㼍㼚㼐㻌㼁㼓㼍㼚㼐㼍㻦㻌㼠㼔㼑㻌㻱㼤㼜㼑㼞㼕㼑㼚㼏㼑㻌㼛㼒㻌㻿㼍㼟㼍㼗㼍㼣㼍㻙㻳㼘㼛㼎㼍㼘㻌㻞㻜㻜㻜 㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻞㻢㻣㻌ఀ⸨ 㐨ኵ㻌 㻌 Michio Ito➲ᕝ䜰䝣䝸䜹༠఍䠄SAA䠅ᮾி஦ົᒁဨ
Administrative and Program Officer, Tokyo Headquarters, Sasakawa Africa Association (SAA), Japan㉁␲ᛂ⟅ Questions and Answers㻌 㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚 㻌 㻞㻤㻢㻌䝥䝻䝣䜱䞊䝹 Profile㻌 㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻞㻤㻤㻌ᇹᲮᇘ ዮӳᛯᜭ
CHAPTER 4 GENERAL DISCUSSION.................................................................................................................................................................................. 㻞㻥㻝㻌ྖ఍䠖 ὸ἟ ಟ୍㻌 㻌 㻌 Moderator: Shuichi Asanumaྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫᅜ㝿ᩍ⫱༠ຊ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊ᩍᤵ
Professor, International Cooperation Center for Agricultural Education (ICCAE), Nagoya University, Japan䝥䝻䝣䜱䞊䝹 Profile㻌 㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻟㻜㻣㻌
㻌㻌㻌㻌㻌

㛢఍䛾㎡㻌
㻯㼘㼛㼟㼕㼚㼓㻌㻾㼑㼙㼍㼞㼗㼟㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚 㻟㻜㻢➉㇂ ⿱அ㻌 㻌 Hiroyuki Takeyaྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫᅜ㝿ᩍ⫱༠ຊ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊㛗䠄2006 ᖺ 10 ᭶ᙜ᫬䠅The Former Director, International Cooperation Center for Agricultural Education (ICCAE),
Nagoya University, Japan⦅㞟ᚋグ㻌㻱㼐㼕㼠㼛㼞䇻㼟㻌㻼㼛㼟㼠㼟㼏㼞㼕㼜㼠 㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚㻚 㻌 㻟㻝㻜㻌

xii
xii

➨㸯❶ ᇶㄪㅮ₇
Chapter 1

Keynote Address

Rice Production in Africa: A Key to Promoting the Sub-Saharan Africa Food Security䜰䝣䝸䜹䛻䛚䛡䜛⡿䛾⏕⏘䠖㻌 䝃䝝䝷௨༡䜰䝣䝸䜹䛾㣗ᩱᏳ඲ಖ㞀䜢ᙉ໬䛩䜛䛯䜑䛾䜻䞊

Rice Production in Africa:
A Key to Promoting the Sub-Saharan Africa Food Security
䝆䝵䞁䞉C䞉䜸䝙䝱䞁䝂

John C. Onyango䜿䝙䜰ᅜ❧䝬䝉䝜኱Ꮫ⌮Ꮫ㒊㛗ྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫᅜ㝿ᩍ⫱༠ຊ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊ᐈဨᩍᤵ 䠆
Professor, Department of Botany and Horticulture, Dean of Faculty of Science,
Maseno University, Kenya
Visiting Professor, International Cooperation Center for Agricultural Education (ICCAE),
Nagoya University, Japan䠆

せ㻌 㻌 ⣙
䜰䝣䝸䜹඲య䛭䛧䛶䜿䝙䜰䛻䛚䛔䛶䚸㎰ᮧఫẸ䛾 60%௨ୖ䛜㈋ᅔ䛷䛒䜛䛸ゝ䜟䜜䛶䛔䜛䚹㈋ᅔ䛿㏻ᖖ䚸೺ᗣ୙Ⰻ䛸ᰤ㣴ኻㄪ䛸䛧䛶⌧䜜䜛䚹῝้䛺㣗⣊୙㊊䛻ຍ䛘䜶䜲䝈䛾ὶ⾜䛜ከ䛟䛾㎰ᮧᆅᇦ䛾≧ἣ䜢䛥䜙䛻ᝏ໬䛥䛫䛶䛔䜛䚹
䜰䝣䝸䜹✄䠄Oryza glabberima䠅䛸䜰䝆䜰✄䠄Oryza sativa䠅䛾஺㓄✀䛷䛒䜛 New Rice for Africa䠄NERICA䠅䛾฼⏝䛿㈋ᅔ䜢๐ῶ䛩䜛᪉⟇䛾୍䛴䛸䛧䛶ᮇᚅ䛥䜜䛶䛔䜛䚹す䜿䝙䜰䛷ᐇ᪋䛥䜜䛯 NERICA ရ✀䛾㐺ᛂᛶ
ヨ㦂䛷䛿䚸䠍䝦䜽䝍䞊䝹ᙜ䜚䠑䝖䞁௨ୖ䛾཰㔞䛜♧䛥䜜䚸䜿䝙䜰ᅜෆ䛾Ỉ✄䛾཰㔞䜢ୖᅇ䛳䛯䚹䝬䝉䝜኱Ꮫ䚸䜰䝹䝨◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊䚸䛚䜘䜃 SACRED-Africa䠄䝤䞁䝂䝬䠅䛾㐺ᛂᛶヨ㦂ᅡሙ䛷㛤ദ䛥䜜䛯㎰Ẹ䛾ぢᏛ఍䛷㎰Ẹ䛜䛣䜜䜢┠䛻䛧䛶䛭䛾஦ᐇ䛻Ẽ䛵䛝䚸⮬ศ㐩䛾㎰ᆅ䛷 NERICA 䜢᱂ᇵ䛧䛯䛔䛸✀Ꮚ䛻ᑐ䛩䜛せᮃ䛜ୖ䛜䛳䛯䚹䛣䛾䛣䛸䛛䜙䚸す䜿䝙䜰䛷௒ᚋ NERICA ✀Ꮚ䛾㟂せ䛜ቑ䛘䜛䛣䛸䛜ண᝿䛥䜜䚸✀Ꮚᥦ౪䝅䝇䝔䝮䜢ᩚ䛘䜛ᚲせᛶ䛜䛒䜛䛸ゝ䛘䜛䚹
NERICA 䛻䛿ᐇ㝿 3,000 ௨ୖ䛾ရ✀䛜䛒䜛䛜䚸す䜰䝣䝸䜹䛷䛿⌧ᅾ䚸⣙ 25 ရ✀䛧䛛฼⏝䛥䜜䛶䛔䛺䛔䚹䜿䝙䜰䛷ධᡭ䛷䛝䜛 NERICA 䛿䜟䛪䛛 20 ရ✀䛷䛒䜚䚸す䜿䝙䜰䛾㎰ᆅ䛷㐺ᛂᛶ䛜䛒䜛䛸ุ᫂䛧䛶䛔䜛䛾䛿䛭䛾䛖䛱䜟䛪䛛 6 ရ✀䛷䛒䜛䚹䛣䜜䜙䛾᥎ዡရ✀䛻䛿ඹ㏻䛩䜛᱂ᇵ≉ᛶ䛜䛒䜚䚸䜰䝣䝸䜹኱㝣䛾ཝ䛧䛔⎔ቃ᮲௳ୗ䛷㛗ᖺ䛻䜟䛯䜚㐍໬䛧䛶䛝䛯䜰䝣䝸䜹✄ရ✀䛾≉ᛶ䜢ᣢ䛴 NERICA 䛿䚸Ỉ୙㊊䜔⑓⹸ᐖ䛺䛹䛾䝇䝖䝺䝇 䛻 ᑐ 䛩 䜛 ⪏ ᛶ 䛜 ඃ 䜜 䛶 䛔 䜛 䚹 NERICA 䛿 ぶ ရ ✀ 䛾 䛔 䛪 䜜 䜘 䜚 䜒 ཰ 㔞 䛜 㧗 䛔 䚹 䠍 ✑ ⢏ ᩘ 䛿 䚸 Oryza
glaberrima 䛜⣙ 100 ⢏䚸Oryza sativa 䛜⣙ 250 ⢏䛷䛒䜛୍᪉䚸NERICA 䛾䠍✑⢏ᩘ䛿⣙ 400 ⢏䛸ከ䛟䚸䛣䜜䛜㧗䛔཰㔞䜢䜒䛯䜙䛧䛶䛔䜛䛸ᛮ䜟䜜䜛䚹䜎䛯䚸NERICA 䛾䝍䞁䝟䜽㉁ྵ㔞䛿 10䡚12䠂䛷䚸ぶရ✀䛾⣙ 8䡚
10䠂䜢ୖᅇ䜛䚹䝁䝯䛿䜰䝆䜰䛷᭱䜒䜘䛟▱䜙䜜䛶䛔䜛✐≀䛷䛒䜚䚸ୡ⏺ேཱྀ䛾༙ศ௨ୖ䛜ᩘୡ⣖䛻䜟䛯䜚㣗䜉⥆䛡䛶䛝䛶
䛔䜛䚹1980 ᖺ௦䛻䜰䝆䜰䛷㉳䛣䛳䛯⥳䛾㠉࿨䛿䚸䝁䝯◊✲䛾ᡂຌ䛻ᣐ䜛䛸䛣䜝䛜኱䛝䛟䚸䛭䛾◊✲䛿⌧ᅾ䜒⥆䛔䛶䛔䜛䚹䛣䛾஦ᐇ䛿䚸䜰䝣䝸䜹䛾㣗⣊஦᝟䜢ゎỴ䛩䜛᪉⟇䜢᥈䜛䛖䛘䛷่⃭䛸䛺䜛䜒䛾䛷䛒䜛䚹1991 ᖺ䛛䜙ˆ2006 ᑈ 10 ᳜䃯ⓨᔧᰖǄ
At the time of presentation in October 2006.

-3３

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8ᩘᖺ䜢⤒䛶䚸NERICA 䛿㣗⣊ಖ㞀䛚䜘䜃᥮㔠స≀䛸䛧䛶す䜰䝣䝸䜹䛷䜘䛟▱䜙䜜䜛䜘䛖䛻䛺䜚䚸ከ䛟䛾㎰Ẹዪᛶ䜾䝹䞊䝥䛜 NERICA 䜢୺せ✐≀స≀䛸䛧䛶᱂ᇵ䛩䜛䜘䛖䛻䛺䛳䛯䚹㣗ᩱ⏕⏘䛸⌧㔠⤒῭䛾ほⅬ䛛䜙䚸NERICA 䛜ᯝ䛯䛩ᙺ๭䛿㠀ᖖ䛻኱䛝䛔䛸⪃䛘䜙䜜䜛䚹䛣䜜䜙䛾䛣䛸䜢㋃䜎䛘䛶௒ᅇ䛾Ⓨ⾲䛷䛿䚸䝃䝝䝷௨༡䜰䝣䝸䜹䛾స≀⏕⏘䛻ᙳ㡪䜢୚䛘䜛㔜せ㡯┠䛻䛴䛔䛶㏙䜉䜛䚹䜎䛯䚸䛭䛾ᙳ㡪ୗ䛻䛒䜛ே䚻䛻ᐤ୚䛩䜛䛯䜑䛻䚸䛭䜜䜙䛾ㄢ㢟䜢䛹䛾䜘䛖䛻᥎㐍䛧䛶䛔䛟䜉䛝䛛䛻䛴䛔䛶䜒㏙䜉䜛䚹◊✲䛻䜘䛳䛶ゎỴ⟇䜢᥈䜛䛸䛔䛖ほⅬ䛛䜙䚸◊✲䜾䝹䞊䝥䛜᪩ᛴ䛻ὀ┠䛩䜉䛝ㄢ㢟䛻ḟ䛾䜘䛖䛺䜒䛾䛜䛒䜛䚹⪏᪭ᛶ䚸⫧ᩱ䛾฼⏝ຠ⋡䚸㞧ⲡ⟶⌮䚸ಖド✀Ꮚ䛾⏕⏘䚸㐣ཤ䛾㝆㞵䝟䝍䞊䞁䛾䝁䞁䝢䝳䞊䝍ゎᯒ䚸⑓ᐖ⹸⟶⌮䚸㛫స䞉㍯స䝅䝇䝔䝮䚸Ỉ✄⏝ NERICA ရ✀䚸䝫䝇䝖䝝䞊䝧䝇䝖ຍᕤ䚸௜ຍ౯್௜୚䞉⢭⡿䞉䝬䞊䜿䝔䜱䞁䜾ᡓ␎䚸ዪᛶ㎰Ẹ䛻䜘䜛ᅵᆅᡤ᭷䚸ప㔠฼⼥㈨䛺䛹䚹

-4４Rice Production in Africa: A Key to Promoting the Sub-Saharan Africa Food Security

Rice Production in Africa:
A Key to Promoting the Sub-Saharan Africa Food Security
John C. Onyango
Professor, Department of Botany and Horticulture, Dean of Faculty of Science,
Maseno University, Kenya
Visiting Professor, International Cooperation Center for Agricultural Education (ICCAE),
Nagoya University, Japan

Abstract
High poverty levels of over 60% have been reported in rural communities in Africa in generaland in Kenya in particular. Poverty levels normally manifest themselves in poor health andmalnutrition. There are high levels of household food insecurity and in most rural areas the situation
is aggravated by the prevalence of HIV/AIDS. Some of the strategies that could contribute to poverty
alleviation, food security and wealth creation have not been given due attention. These strategies
include the use of NEw RIce for AfriCA, code named NERICA, which was developed by crossing
the African rice (Oryza glabberima) and the Asian rice (Oryza sativa). Adaptability trials for the
NERICA varieties in Western Kenya showed a yield potential of over 5 tons per hectare which ishigher than the yields obtained in Kenya for irrigated rice. Farmers field days conducted at Maseno
University, Alupe Research Center and SACRED-Africa in Bungoma adaptability trials sites havecreated awareness to the rural farmers and they have put in request for seeds of NERICA varieties totry on their farms. This implies that, there is demand for seed and therefore a need to set up seedsupport systems for NERICA in Western Kenya as the demand is anticipated to rise. NERICA is notjust one cultivar, but there are actually over 3,000 different NERICA varieties, although farmers inWest Africa currently are using only about 25 cultivars. In Kenya only about 20 cultivars areavailable out of which 6 varieties have been identified as promising in Western Kenya
agro-ecological region. The preferred varieties share some common features of the rice growthcultures. Reflecting the characteristics of African rice varieties that have evolved over centuries in
the continent’s difficult environmental conditions, NERICA is very hardy, resistant to stresses suchas water deficit, common rice diseases and pests. NERICA produces significantly higher grain yields
than the two parent varieties. Each panicle of the Oryza glaberrima has about 100 grains and eachpanicle of Oryza sativa has 250. But NERICAs’ panicles hold an average of 400 grains and this
explains the high harvest observed. Each grain of NERICA has more protein than either of theparents: while the parents have a protein content of about 8-10 per cent, NERICA can reach 10-12
per cent.
Rice is a cereal crop best known in Asia and has fed well over half of the world’s population for
centuries. The success of the crop research led to the green revolution in Asia in the 1980’s and is
still strong. This can provide an incentive in finding a better solution for the African problem. Overthe years from 1991 NERICA has become a household name in West Africa in terms of foodsecurity and cash crop in the region. Many women group farmers have adopted NERICA as theirmain cereal crop. The role NERICA plays in food production and cash economy cannot be overemphasized. This presentation is therefore, aimed at addressing the pertinent issues that affect thecrop production in Sub-Saharan Africa and how it can be accelerated for the benefit of the affected
population. Some of the factors which require urgent attention by scientific community in terms ofsolution exploration through research are: drought tolerance; nutrient use efficiency; weed control;
production of certified seeds; computation of historical rainfall pattern; pests and diseases control;inter- and relay cropping systems; development of lowland NERICA varieties and buffer crops;
post-harvest processing; value addition, milling and marketing strategies; land ownership by womenfarmers and availability of low interest credit facilities, among others.

-5５International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8share of the responsibility apart from advocatingivory tower autonomy.

1.0 Introduction
Farmers in most Sub-Saharan Africa produced
enough food commodities for the continent’s
populations up to 1960s at the time of independence
for most countries. After attaining independence
from the imperial powers the Africa population
started growing at a faster rate than food production.
By 1980s most countries were pleading to thedeveloped world for food aids. By 1985-88 the late
photo journalist Mohammed Amin brought theplight of dying Africans especially the horn ofAfrica to the world attention and something had tobe done. In most African countries over 60% of the
population live in the rural areas with Agriculture as
their main survival activity both for food security
and economic empowerment. However, most
governments have either given agriculture and ruraldevelopment a low priority or pursued impracticalpolicies to protect their stay in power. Investments
in improved roads network, input delivery, value
addition to agricultural produce and grain marketingsystems also in agricultural research, extension andgeneral education have been woefully in adequate.
Cheap food policies to appease the politicallyinformed urban dwellers have greatly distorted
production incentives for framers.

Rice is known to be staple food for half of theworld’s over 6.5 billion people (International
2006). It is the cereal of choice and is produced andconsumed in Asia in large quantity. In Sub-SaharanAfrica the demand is increasing and has surpassed
production leading to importation of about 46% inorder to meet the region’s demand but this is a drain
to foreign reserve which is valued at more than
US$1.5 billion per annum to most countries in theregion (WARDA 2006). Rice has become a major
source of calories not only for the affluent, but also
for the urban and rural poor in many parts of thecontinent. Its availability and price have become
major determinants of the welfare of the poorest
African consumers. The notion that rice was only
consumed by the urban affluent population does not
apply any more since the consumption is actually
dictated by availability and affordability of thecereal. It is the preferred food for the ruralcommunities as well especially in regions where thecrop is grown and therefore market price isaffordable. To reduce rice import and achieveself-sufficiency in rice in most countries, theproduction of the crop in the sub-region will have to
be increased and the quality of local rice must becomparable to the imported rice in order to maintainthe market parity. To enhance the quality of local
rice and its preference, improvements in bothvarietals’ and value addition aspects must be taken
into consideration in packaging. The current trends
in rice production, particularly in Asia which has
been the global rice basket is worrying due torespective governments’ restrictions in their local
rice production. This will definitely affect the rice
net importers from Africa in terms of food security
for their nationals. To mitigate against the expectedout come, the Sub-Saharan Africa region must alignitself into the promotion of rice production within
the region. This is where the achievements whichhave been made in NERICA development since1991 come into play.

The major development problem in Africa isinfrastructure that is roads, dams, electricity andcommunication. These are areas which were ignoredby the colonial powers as opposed to thedevelopment pattern in Asia and Latin America
before the de-colonization era in those regions. The
emerging African governments have not done mucheither and some have even worsen the situation; takethe case of Zimbabwe in the recent years. All thesehave resulted in negative agricultural developmentin the continent giving way to starvation andrampant poverty. A concerted effort is needed
within the continent to correct this situation before it
explodes to the detriment of human kind. Africa
needs assistance from development partners and bestpractices from outside the continent, however, theAfrican government must understand that any
sustainable success to these measures must be homegrown and have the political good will. Strong
economies and high quality of life are all integral
part of good and responsive governance in terms of
economic and development policies. It is importantto take note that perfection is a peacock theacademics chase and never catch. As researchers
and intellectual think tanks we must undertake our

Rice has been grown in East Africa for several
centuries. In Kenya the crop is grown in the Lake
Victoria basin in Nyanza and Western Provinces, inCentral Kenya at Mwea Schemes and along theIndian Ocean coastal marsh areas. Over this periodof time the crop has been subject to selection by
farmers for performance in the rather dry climate of
East Africa. The main rice growing regions in-6６Rice Production in Africa: A Key to Promoting the Sub-Saharan Africa Food Security

1991 NERICA has become a household name inWest Africa in terms of food security and cash cropin the region. Many women-group farmers haveadopted NERICA as their main cereal crop.
NERICA produces significantly higher grain yields
than the two parent varieties. Each panicle of the
Oryza glaberrima has about 100 grains and eachpanicle of Oryza sativa has 250. But NERICA’s
panicles hold an average of 400 grains and this
explains the high harvest observed. Each grain of
NERICA has more protein than either of the parents.
While the parents have a protein content of about
8-10 per cent, NERICA can reach 10-12 per cent(Fujii et al., 2004). NERICA matures considerably
faster within a period of 90-100 day after planting.
This not only ensures food security among thefarming communities, but also reduces poverty
levels through sales of excess produce (Onyango
and Onyango 2006).

Tanzania include Mwanza, Shinyanga, Mara andKagera regions, which produce almost one third of
the country’s rice demand. Shinyanga, Mwanza andMara do produce about 25% of the Country’s totalrice production. The main rice growing regions in
Uganda, include Jinja, Mukono, Kampala, Mayuge
and Bugiri districts while the upland rice and
NERICA research activities is concentrated at
Namulonge and other NARO research Centers. In
Uganda there is increasing interest in rainfed ricecultivation by farmers. This interest has mainly beenstimulated by sensitizing farmers on the importanceof rice as an income generating crop and foodsecurity. The rice production is mainly done byfarmers in groups in order to lower the cost of
production. Over 60% of land being cultivated isunder upland rice at the moment causing highdemand for seed rice since 2000, unlike in the past
years when demand for seed rice from the District
farm institutes was rather low. The difference inmaturity of the varieties, water condition in thefields and labour availability of the households
determines the length of harvesting season that
ranges from 145-175 days (Zuma, 2004). The rice
yields ranges from 500 kg to 3,500 kg depending on
the moisture availability, cultivars used, soil fertility
and timeliness of field operations. No other crops
are planted after rice harvesting although these
relatively wet fields could be used for short season
crops such as vegetables and legumes. Local
communities are not aware of the utilization of theresidual moisture after harvesting rice, or othersources of water.

The role NERICA plays in food production andcash economy cannot be over emphasized. This
presentation is therefore, aimed at addressing thepertinent issues that affect the crop production in
Africa and how it can be accelerated to the benefitof the sub-Saharan Africa population. Initial studies
carried out in Western Kenya at Maseno, Kisumu
district; Alupe, Teso district and Siritanyi, Bungoma
district from 2004 to 2006 have given promising
results in production. Farmers in these regions aredemanding seeds of the NERICA cultivars to growon their farms, mostly small scale farmers. Rice as acrop is generally grown in small plots of about one
hectare blocks. This is because of its labour
requirements. It is only in the six rice growing statesof U.S.A. where large commercial farmers are found
due to mechanization (Onyango 2006). In Africa thetarget farmers shall be the small scale farmers withlow capital base at the initial stage. During theadaptability trials six NERICA cultivars have been
identified for seed multiplication (production) for
release to demanding farmers. The cultivars are
NERICAs N1, N4, N6, N8, N10, and N11. Seedbulking of the above cultivars have been achieved
and enough seeds for multiplication can be provided
from the University Botanic Garden, Maseno
NERICA seed stock. Further more training ofadaptability trial researchers and technicians on
harmonization of research and production operations
have been achieved for the pilot group.

NERICA has become so popular in certain
districts of Uganda that some farmers are evenabandoning other crops to produce rice. This change
in trend and awareness has been increased by the
dissemination of research through extension
activities and political good-will by Uganda
government officials. The crop has been reported toyield up to 4-5 tones per hectare in farmers’ fields,
which translates to US$ 2000 in local markets interms of income to the farmer. NERICA is preferredin East Africa because of its short duration tomaturity – about 90 – 110 days.
Rice is a cereal crop best known in Asia and has
fed over half of the world’s population for centuries.
The success of the crop research led to green
revolution in Asia in the 1970’s and is still strong.
This can provide a more vigour in finding a better
recipe for the African problem. Over the years from

1.1 Problem statement-7７International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8periods of cultivation in low precipitation conditions(Fujii et al., 2004). This is because high dry matteraccumulation during drought by drought tolerance
cultivars is due to their ability to absorb soil water.
However, physiological characteristics of NERICA
are not fully known and there is an urgent need to
conduct research in NERICA physiologicalparameters geared to high productivity underlimiting water availability. The trend of ricecultivation is going towards the upland production
rather than irrigated. The kind of infrastructure
which goes with the paddy rice production is rather
expensive for most small holder farmers. Because of
these problems, most farmers tend to go for upland
rice production, based on rainfall but if there is any
irrigation, it will be by gravity from rainfall
harvested water or from small streams. The are threerice irrigation systems for lowland rice in Kenya
which are situated in Ahero, West Kano andBunyala in Western Kenya, Mwea Tabere in Central
and Bura in North Eastern Kenya, but all of the are
performing under capacity. In Western Kenyaelectricity is used to pump water and as the cost ofelectricity goes up, it becomes expensive to supply
water while in Central and North Eastern Kenya,gravity irrigation is used but during droughts thelevel of rivers go down.

The role of NERICA is not only improving thefood situation in Africa but also improves the
livelihoods and the economic situation of the ruraland urban poor has not been exploited. There is needto sensitize the communities on NERICA cultivationin East Africa. Nonetheless, there is no establishedseed support system for NERICA resulting in lackof quality seed. Inadequate Agronomic andphysiological studies have been carried out. Limited
research done has not been fully disseminated tofarming communities there is therefore need for up
scaling the known technical information to the wider
farming communities in the region.

1.2
NERICA has been identified as one of theAfrica’s “best practices” worth up scaling. The
development of NERICA was heavily funded by thegovernment of Japan and IFAD with ARC Scientists
producing desired results (WARDA 1999).
NERICA adaptation and production in West Africa
has played a key role in reducing poverty andmalnutrition in the region. The expansion of
NERICA cultivation throughout Sub-Saharan Africa
has been hailed by NEPAD member countries
because of its adaptability and high productivity.
The aim of this presentation is therefore, to explore
how NERICA can be integrated into the existing
varietals’ portfolio for Sub-Saharan Africa farmers
with complementary technologies to maximize
production at minimal input level. This will spirally
lead to better natural resource management practices
and improved rice marketing and availability to ruralcommunities. The findings from the researchstrategies and up-scaling of production technologies
will also be a resource and attribute to theperformance and implementation by various
Ministry of Agriculture extension services indifferent countries in the region. If coordinated wellthen this will enhance the role of NERICA in foodsecurity and poverty reduction in Africa.

Establishing seed banks requires elaborate
information on the ecophysiology of the donor
plants, especially with regard to overcoming
environmental constraints, since stress is a major
limitation to crop production worldwide. This will
ensure that well adapted germplasms are established,which are able to survive and achieve acceptablelevels of bio-productivity. The Western parts of
Kenya for example, are faced with intermittent dry
spells accompanied with high rates of
evapo-transpiration, more negative soil–water
potentials and decreasing soil–water supply capacity
to the plants. Plants in such environments must
therefore, posse’s adaptable strategies (Kramer1980), which will enable them achieve their waterrequirements for maximum rates of shoot growth
and transpiration, without undergoing cavitation(Sperry 2000). Such plants must attain a balance
between shoot and root activities in order to ensure
productivity without compromising survival (Otieno
et al. in press). Understanding soil water uptake
patterns by of the NERICA varieties and theassociated shoot responses to water loss underlimited water supply will help explain differences in
productivity, survival and distribution among

Detailed analysis of limiting factors
NERICA varieties were developed for rainfed or
upland conditions; however, there is need toquantify the spectrum of several varieties incultivation with regard to their water requirements
for effective production. From previous experiments
it has become clear that there are some NERICA
lines that show high growth with low uptake ofwater and they seem to be appropriate for long-8８

Rice Production in Africa: A Key to Promoting the Sub-Saharan Africa Food Security¾ Weed control has been identified as a factor,
reducing NERICA production in East Africa,
especially the Striga hermonthica which causes
up to 70% loses in cereals. Identification of
NERICA varieties that can withstand the weeds
effect will be desirable to promote production.
Striga is the main parasitic weed devastating
NERICA production in Sub-Saharan African.
Striga compensates for lack of its own rootsystem by penetrating the roots of rice, diverting
essential nutrients from them, and stunting their
growth. Striga infests an estimated half of the 8.5
million hectares devoted to rice in Africa,
resulting in crop losses of up to 60% among rice
farmers. Striga is considered to be the main
obstacle to sufficient food production in Africa.
Most farmers have been using cultural method of
weed control through crop rotation with cultivars
that encourage suicidal germination of striga
seeds but the methods is too slow for effective
land use. Other modern method such as the useof Fungus (Fusarium oxysporum) is rather
expensive to the target farmers (Ciotola et al.,1995).

species and varieties as well as provide selection
criteria for the preferred gene banks. Few studies
exist on the eco-physiological responses of the
NERICA varieties. This information is howeverrequired to further our understanding of theirautecology in natural or agro-ecosystems. There is
growing interest in identifying and selecting
genotypes that will maintain growth andproductivity under limited water conditions.
¾ Although the breeders credit NERICA with low
nutrient demand, no results are available toquantify the requirement in the various Africanagro-ecological regions where the crop is grown.
NERICA may need the shuttle breeding approachin order to produce varieties which are adaptive
to several regions of different agro-ecologicalstructures. Through this process varieties which
can perform well in the Sub-Saharan Africa canbe produced or selected within a short time,
thereby reducing the breeding programme period.
The fertilizer use has been in high debate for avery long time as a factor in improving crop
production.
Actually, even the Green
Revolution in Asia that is, India and Pakistan, thefertilizer was a problem and so was the crop
production. But I think the scientists who were
dealing with the crop at that particular time madethe governments realize that if the aim was toincrease production then fertilizer had to be
involved. If that (increased use of fertilizer) is
going to be the case, even though the farmers arepoor, they are ready to offer labor on their farms,
so the government should come up with subsidy
to bale them out to increase NERICA production.
The problem with the fertilizer is still there as at
now we also have environmentalists who areconcerned with pollution factors caused byfertilizer run-off from farm lands. However, thiscan be mitigated by having buffer crops to takeup run-off nutrient load before discharge into
water bodies. Since the subsidy worked forGreen Revolution it is possible to employ thesame method to increase production. The
countries affected with low rice production
spends about US$ 1.5 billion to import rice, itfollows that, if they spend a fraction of thatmoney to access fertilizer for farmers then they
can assist small holder producer increase
production. The agricultural extension staff will
also help with safe environmental managementof fertilizer usage.

¾ In recent Africa Rice Congress (ARC) in
Tanzania, it was realized that Sub-Saharan Africa
has the lowest number of available scientificexpertise which is about 83 scientists per million
people, compared to 1100 scientist per million inindustrialized countries and 785 per million in
Asia. At this level of scientific expertise in
Africa, it is paramount that capacity-building
programme focusing on the development of amulti-disciplinary researchers and extension staff
is urgently needed.
¾ Lack of certified seeds is the main draw back toreleasing some of the high potential NERICA
varieties in Kenya. Efforts are now being madeto bulk the seeds of selected NERICA lines forrelease to farmers by 2008 long rains season but
there is also a need to bring in private sector
stakeholders in certified seed production andmarketing. Sasakawa-Global 2000 has played therole of seed production successfully in Asia andUganda. Their role lead to successful green
revolution in Asia and rapid dissemination of
NERICA production in both East and West
Africa and involvement of selected farmers in theinformal seed multiplication. African Rice
Congress took the cognizance of the importanceof NERICA seed production in Africa and-9９International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

in most countries to allow women to acquire andown land as a natural resource base for riceproduction. Actually the problem we have is that,
it is the women who are actually more active inagriculture. The women according to our
statutory set up do not own land. In other words
you might have group of women who want toparticipate in NERICA cultivation. Since they
don’t have land, they have to get permission
from their husbands.

recommended that farmers adoption of NERICA
should be accelerated and other improved
technologies, concerted action by partnership
including governments, research institutions, theprivate sector, local, regional and internationalorganizations are needed (ARC 2006).
¾ Intercropping NERICA with maize and sorghum
is a common practice in upland cultures in
Sub-Saharan Africa for various reasons. To
enhance this practice we are investigating theintercropping or relay cropping NERICA withleguminous pulses for soil improvement at
Maseno University. Good adaptive technology
researchers must know how to implement thetechnologies themselves without relying on thetechnicians to do the work. It is more difficult toinculcate what one knows only in theory. The
practical aspect is very important and should bemaster right from the laboratory andexperimental field. Intercropping of NERICA
with legumes is being experimented in Western
Kenya (Maseno University) with the main
purpose of replenishment of the soil nitrogen,because the two crops are legumes, hence goodin nitrogen fixation at scientific level. But atcommunity level, most farmers we are dealing
with are already intercropping Soya beans andBambara groundnuts with maize. Our
experiments are therefore aimed at developing a
package for technology transfer. We want tohave enough information for this transfer so that
we can win farmers’ confidence in using rice
instead of maize thereby increasing the
production.
¾ Value addition and milling requires quick accessto good quality mills to enhance profitability of
the rice produce by farmers in contrast to the
middle traders. Market surveys and identificationof ready market for the produce will also enticemore small-holder farmers to continue with riceproduction both for food security and cash crop.
In Uganda farmers have earned up to Ush.
3,740,000 (about US$ 2,000) for NERICA
production per hectare. This earning has enables
NERICA farmers to meet several of their family
obligations.
¾ Women have been identified to be key players in
NERICA production in Africa and yet they do
not own land. Sustainable production will
therefore require a review of land tenure system

Concluding remarks
It is a clear knowledge that the Japanese
Government made a very strong promise to theAfrican governments; this was at the World Summit
on sustainable development in Johannesburg, South
Africa in the year 2002 that was followed by
NEPAD and the involvement in the NERICA
production. I understand that the third TICAD iscoming in two years time and we would like to learn
about the success story on the Japanese government
contribution in NERICA production in Africa. Fromthe contributions presented in this Open Forum it isclear that there are several aspects of NERICA
production, in Africa and all of them are geared
towards sorting out food shortage in Africa. I think
it is only the last presentation by Sasakawa 2000
which mentioned that in case of Uganda, NERICA
is actually not being produced to sort out the foodproblem it is being produce as a cash crop, andifthat is a case it is still a contribution because thatwill be alleviating the foreign currency balance fromthe Uganda government, therefore, we are still in theright direction.
In my prioritization brief we are talking of theupland conditions of rice production. When we talkof upland situation, it is soil moisture which keeps
fluctuating and we need to arrest it. Most of us plantscientists are very quick at looking at what ishappening above ground which everyone canobserve. But what happens below ground which is
being expressed by the above ground characters wedon’t know, this is where precipitation or waterrequirement under upland conditions comes inhandy and we need to look at that. I would not liketo go GMO direction, I would like to go through theconventional breeding if at all we can identify themarkers which code for less water usage and thatwill definitely be tied to water use efficiency among
the various NERICA. If we can identify this we will
have made more or less 50 % contribution towards- 10 １０

Rice Production in Africa: A Key to Promoting the Sub-Saharan Africa Food Security

promotion of NERICA production in Africa, given
the fact that agro-ecological situation is very fragile.
That is my first line, looking at the waterrequirement and that will entail looking at below
and above ground structures of NERICA varieties.
One advantage we have is that
there are several
NERICA varieties and it seems that the regions in
Africa have already identified which lines they want
to use and therefore those lines should be
investigated for desirable traits. The other aspect
which came out very clearly is the question ofavailability of certified seed. The contribution of
double naming of NERICAs’ seeds in Uganda isreal. There is a variety which is NERICA 4 which
one commercial seed firm calls it Suparica 2 while
National Agricultural Research Organization(NARO) also in Uganda calls it Naric 3. This creates
confusion to farmers. They are growing same
variety but depending on where they sourced theseed they think the varieties are different. Therefore
we need to look at the seed aspect and harmonize it.
This would ensure seed purity which is very
fundamental in genotype research. From those twomain points, there should be some socio-economic
activities which prepare farmers at the farm level toreceive some of the NERICA technology which cancomplement lack of greenhouses.

Ciotola, M., A.K. Watson and S.G. Hallet 1995.
Discovery of an isolate of Fusarium oxysporumwith potential to control Striga hermonthica in
Afica. Weed research 35:(4) 303-309.

References

Onyango, J.C. and Onyango, M.O.A. (2000).
Characteristics of root system and water uptake in
two cultivars of rice (Oryza sativa L.). Maseno
Journal of Education, Arts and Science 3(2):138-149.

Abukutsa-Onyango, M.O., G.N. Mwai and
J.C.Onyango, 2005. Studies on horticultural
practices of some African Indigenous
Vegetables at Maseno University. In:
Abukutsa-Onyango. M.O., A.N. Muriithi,
K.Ngamau, V.Anjichi, S.G. Agong, A. Fricke,
B.Hau and H Stützel. 2005. Proceedings of theThird Horticulture Workshop on Sustainable
Horticultural Production in the Tropics, 26th
-29th November 2003. Maseno University,
Maseno, Kenya.
AICAD (2003), “Overview of poverty situation in
Kenya, Uganda and Tanzania” AICAD/JICA,
Nairobi.
Chweya, J.A. and P.B. Eyzaguire, 1999. The
biodiversity of traditional leafy vegetables.
International Plant Genetic Resources Institute,Rome, Italy.

Fujii, M., C.Andoh and S. Ishihara 2004. Drought
resistence of NERICA (New Rice for Africa)
compared with Oryza sativa . and millet
evaluated by stomatal conductance and soil watercontent. Proceedings of the 4th International Crop
Science Congress, 26 Sep – 1 Oct 2004, Brisbane,
Australia. ISBN 1 9200842 20 9
Hesser, L. 2006. The Man Who Fed the World.
Nobel Peace Prize Laureate,
NormanBorlaug and his battle to end World hunger.
Durban House Publishing Company, Inc. Dallas,
Texas. Pp 263.
International 2006. United States Census Bureau,
International Data Base, August 2006 version.
Onyango, J.C. and M.O.A. Onyango (1999).
Potentials for rainfed rice ( Oryza sativa L. )production and germplasm development in Kenya
in: Proceedings of the 6th KARI Conference, 9th
to 13th, November, 1998 KARI Headquarters,
Nairobi. Kenya. Pp. 562-566.

Onyango, J.C. 2006. Rice, a Crop for WealthCreation: Productivity and Prospects in Kenya’s
Food Security. Professorial Inaugural Lecture
Nr. 2 – Presented at Kisumu Hotel – Maseno
University, 24 May 2006, Kisumu, Kenya.
Onyango, J.C. and Onyango, M.O.A. (2006).
Adaptability trials of five NERICA cultivars at
Maseno. Proceedings of NERICA workshop,
16-17 February 2006, AICAD, Nairobi, Kenya.
Schippers, R.R. 2000. African indigenous
vegetables an overview of the cultivated species.
Chatham, UK. Natural Resources Institute/ACP-EU Technical Centre for Agricultural andrural Cooperation.

- 11 １１International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

WARDA, 1999. New Rice for Africa – NERICA
development and release. WARDA Annual
Report 1999, pp 9-15.
Zuma 2004. Production of rice and dissemination in
Africa: in: Seminar on production anddissemination in Africa. AICAD, Nairobi, Kenya,
February 10-11, 2004.

- 12 １
２

Rice Production in Africa: A Key to Promoting the Sub-Saharan Africa Food Security

RICE PRODUCTION IN AFRICA:A KEY TO PROMOTING THE SUBSAHARAN AFRICA FOOD SECUTY
jconyango@yahoo.com

BY

J.C. ONYANGODEPARTMENT OF BOTANY AND HORTICULTURE
FACULTY OF SCIENCE, MASENO UNIVERSITYAND VISITING PROFESSOR, ICCAE,
NAGOYA UNIVERSITY

7TH ICCAE OPEN FORUM AT NOYORI Memorial
Conference Hall, NAGOYA UNIVERSITY
20TH OCTOBER 2006
1
KEYNOTE ADDRESS

Introduction• Rice is a crop that is currently feeding over a halfof the world’s 6.5 million population and doubles
as both subsistence and export cereals.
• Rice production is increasingly becoming a key
issue in cereal growth and development in the
Sub-Saharan Africa region.
• The increasing consumer preference has
pushed rice into the list of most important cropsthat requires concerted effort in production.
2- 13 １３

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Food Production by Independence•••

Farmers in most Sub-Saharan Africa
produced enough food commodities forthe continent’s populations up to 1960s
at the time of independence for mostcountries.
After attaining independence from theimperial powers the Africa population
started growing at a faster rate than foodproduction.
By 1980s most countries were pleading
to the developed world for food aids.
3

Infrastructure constraint• The major development problem in Africa
is infrastructure that is roads, dams,
electricity and communication.
• These are areas which were ignored by
the colonial powers as opposed to thedevelopment pattern in Asia and Latin
America before the de-colonization era inthose regions.
4- 14 １
４

Rice Production in Africa: A Key to Promoting the Sub-Saharan Africa Food Security

Governance and Development• Strong economies and high quality of life are
all integral part of good and responsive
governance in terms of economic anddevelopment policies.
• It is important to take note that perfection is apeacock the academics chase and nevercatch.
• As researchers and intellectual think tank wemust undertake our share of the responsibility
apart from advocating academic freedom.
5

WARDA’s involvement in Sub-Saharan Africa

䖩

WARDA Members Statesand ARI

䖩
䖩
䖩

䖩
䖩 䖩 䖩

䖩䠖ARI pilot country䖩

ARI & INGER-Africa
ROCARIZ & INGER-Africa
INGER-AFRICA only
Non-affiliated countries
Others6

Source, ARI Cotonou 2006

- 15 １５

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8㻭㻾㻵㻌㻱㼤㼜㼑㼞㼕㼙㼑㼚㼠㼍㼘㻌㻿㼕㼠㼑㼟㼃㻭㻾㻰㻭㻙㻿㼍㼔㼑㼘㼀㼔㼑㻌㻳㼍㼙㼎㼕㼍㻌㻙 㻺㻭㻾㻵㻳㼡㼕㼚㼑㼍㻌㻙 㻵㻾㻭㻳㻮㼑㼚㼕㼚㻌㻙 㻵㻺㻾㻭㻮㼃㻭㻾㻰㻭㻙㻵㻵㼀㻭㼃㻭㻾㻰㻭㻌㻴㻽
: 㻱㼤㼜㼑㼞㼕㼙㼑㼚㼠㻦㻌㼃㻭㻾㻰㻭

Source, ARI Cotonou 2006

㻦㻌㻶㻵㻯㻭㻌㻻㼒㼒㼕㼏㼑 7

Agro-ecological Zones for the NERICAs - Kenya

4
32 1

5
6

8

7

9
10
11

- 16 １６

1. KARI – Kibos
2. Maseno
3. Alupe Busia
4. Bungoma
5. Tot – Marakwet
6. Arror - Marakwet
7. Mwea Tabere
8. JKUAT - AICAD
9. TARDA - Kilifi
10. KARI – Matuga
8
11. CDA -Msambweni

Rice Production in Africa: A Key to Promoting the Sub-Saharan Africa Food Security

NERICA Potential• In Sub-Saharan Africa the demand for rice
is increasing and has surpassed
production leading to importation of about
46% in order to meet the region’s demand.
• This is a drain to foreign reserve which isvalued at more than US$1.5 billion perannum to most countries in the region.
9

Global Rice Production Trend• The current trends in rice production,
particularly in Asia which has been the
global rice basket is worrying due torespective governments’ restrictions intheir local rice production.
• This will definitely affect the rice net
importers from Africa in terms of foodsecurity for their nationals.
10- 17 １７

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Hunger Alleviation in Africa• To mitigate against the expected out come,the Sub-Saharan Africa region must alignitself into the promotion of rice production
within the region.
• This is where the achievements whichhave been made in NERICA development
since 1991 come into play.
11

Rice Cultivation regions in East Africa• Kenya: Nyanza and Western Provinces,
Marakwet, Kirinyanga, Kilifi,
Mombasa and Kwale.
• Tanzania: Mwanza, Shinyanga, Mara andKagera regions.
• Uganda: Jinja, Mukono, Kampala, Mayuge
and Bugiri districts.
12- 18 １８

Rice Production in Africa: A Key to Promoting the Sub-Saharan Africa Food Security

NERICA Yields in East Africa• The rice yields ranges from 1500 kg to 5,000kg depending on the moisture availability,
cultivars used, soil fertility and timeliness offield operations.
• No other crops are planted after rice
harvesting although these relatively wet fields
could be used for short season crops such as
vegetables and legumes.
• NERICA has become so popular in certain
districts of Uganda that some farmers areeven abandoning other crops to produce rice.
13

NERICA Dissemination and Economy• The change in trend and awareness has been
increased by the dissemination of researchthrough extension activities and political goodwill by Uganda government officials.
• The crop has been reported to yield up to 4-5
tones per hectare in farmers’ fields, whichtranslates to US$ 2000 in local markets in termsof income to the farmer.
• NERICA is preferred in East Africa because of
its short duration to maturity – about 90 – 110
days.
14

- 19 １９International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

NERICA Best Practices• NERICA has been identified as one of theAfrica’s “best practices” worth up scaling.
• The development of NERICA was heavily
funded by the government of Japan and
IFAD with ARC Scientists producing
desired results.
• NERICA adaptation and production inWest Africa has played a key role in
reducing poverty and malnutrition in theregion.
15

Need to Increase NERICA Production• There is need to sensitize the communities
on NERICA cultivation in East Africa.
Nonetheless, there is no established seedsupport system for NERICA resulting inlack of quality seed.
• Inadequate Agronomic and physiologicalstudies have been carried out.
• Limited research done has not been fully
disseminated to farming communities
therefore, there is need for up scaling the
known technical information to the wider
Farming communities in the region.
16- 20 ２０

Rice Production in Africa: A Key to Promoting the Sub-Saharan Africa Food Security

Role of Japan and NEPAD• The expansion of NERICA cultivation
throughout Sub-Saharan Africa has been
hailed by the Government of Japan and
NEPAD member countries because of its
adaptability and high productivity.
• The aim of this presentation is therefore,
to explore how NERICA can be integrated
into the existing varietals’ portfolio for SubSaharan Africa farmers withcomplementary technologies to maximize
production at minimal input level.
17

Production Constraints in Ethiopia• Introduction of breeding materials and commercial
varieties for different rice ecosystems• Variety development for different ecosystems• Developing suitable agronomic practices fordifferent ecosystems• Post –harvest management• Food science research• Marketing channel• Capacity building• Creating strong linkage with International Rice
Research Institutions, Private Investers,
governmental and non-governmental organizations.
18- 21 ２１

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Rice Field Day in Ethiopia• Farmers appreciatedthe candidate
varieties (NERICA-3,
NERICA-4 andSuparica-1 for their:
9 early maturity
9 ability to grow on
drained soil and low
water requirement.
9 disease resistance
9 non-shattering nature
9 seed quality such as
seed size, seed color
19
9 Long panicle.

NERICA 4 SEED MULTIPLICATIONPAWE ETHIOPIA, OCTOBER 2005

NERICA 4 AT 1200 masl = 110-120 DAYS TO MATURITY- 22 ２２

20

Rice Production in Africa: A Key to Promoting the Sub-Saharan Africa Food Security

Mozambique Rice Production¾ Agriculture contributes 25.9% of total GDP.
¾ Rice is 6th main crop in Mozambique.
¾ Rice production areas - Central region – 62 %,North region – 31 % and South region – 7%.
¾ Rice is cultivated in 182,000 ha and production
was 187,000 tons in 2005.
¾ Rice import is 340,000 tons at a value of
US$70 million to meet a demand of 527,000
tons in 2005.
¾ Calories based consumption – Rice is 3rd - 234
calories, after Cassava-718 and Maize-534. 21

NERICA in Zambezia Region

NERICA Growing under irregular
rainfed
3 months after germination

NERICA 4 varieties – Different Stages
One Local variety – still Catching Up

22- 23 ２
３

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Insect Rice pests in Mozambique23

Insect pests in rice field in Arror
Marakwet, Kenya

24- 24 ２
４

Rice Production in Africa: A Key to Promoting the Sub-Saharan Africa Food Security

Pests affecting NERICA at SACRED-Africa

White grubs

Termites

Field ants
25

stem borer

NERICA 4

NERICA Trials
in Farmer’s
Fields - Ghana
NERICA 2

26

NERICA 1- 25 ２５International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

NERICA
Production
by Farmers in
Ghana

NERICA 3

27

NERICA 1

Grain Yield for some NERICAs in Ghana
Days from seeding to maturity
Variety I
N-1
118
N-4
118
N-6
122

II
106
106
111

Variety I

Yield (Kg.ha-1)
II
III
IV

Mean

N-1
N-4
N-6

4982
3653
4955

3020
2506
3418

2576
2531
3171

III
106
106
111

3288
2384
3593

- 26 ２
６

IV
115
115
117

1235
1456
1951

Mean
111
111
115

28

Rice Production in Africa: A Key to Promoting the Sub-Saharan Africa Food Security

Rice seed multiplication field in Kilobero
region, Tanzania

29

VARIETAL TRIAL NAMULONGE UGANDANERICA-5: HIGHEST
YIELDING CULTIVAR
Maturity: 120 DAS
Yield t/ha: 4.42
Shatter habit: VD

30- 27 ２７

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Supplementary irrigation of varietal trials
at the critical stage of booting

31

LONGTERM FERTILITY TRIAL

32- 28 ２８

Rice Production in Africa: A Key to Promoting the Sub-Saharan Africa Food Security

NERICA 4 in Farmer’s Field Near
Namulonge, Uganda

33

Drought Tolerance Trials at
ARI Center34- 29 ２９International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Breeding Programme at ARI Center,
Cotonou Benin

35

Variety Selection Programme at
ARI Center

NERICA 4 – Maseno Trials
NERICA 4 – Farmer’s Field, Uganda

36- 30 ３０

Rice Production in Africa: A Key to Promoting the Sub-Saharan Africa Food Security

NERICAs in Kenya• NERICAs have been tried in Kenya forlast three years.
• Yields obtained from the trials have beenpromising.
• The NERICAs have proved to be superior
than the local varieties• From the 3 years results: -NERICAs havebeen developed for various agroecological zones.
37

Research hypothesis to be tested• Low and unstable yields of NERICA
cultivars is caused by the unreliable
rainfall in Sub-Saharan Africa’s arable
areas.
• Increased rice productivity will solve theproblem of household food insecurity,
wealth creation and poor natural resource
management affected by increasing
population.
38- 31 ３１

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Rain Water pool in NERICA Field
Student Taking Florescence Measurements

39

POT EXPERIMENTS FOR WATERREGIME EVALUATION40- 32 ３
２

Rice Production in Africa: A Key to Promoting the Sub-Saharan Africa Food Security

GREENHOUSE EXPERIMENTS:
Some growth parameters•________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________•CULTIVARS

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

LengthLengthHarvest
(cm)
(cm)
(cm)
(dae)
______________________________________________________________________
T1
104bc
18b
25a
115bcd
T2
104bc
17bc
24abc
114cd
T3
102bc
14b-e
24abc
115bcd
T4
93bc
12de
23a-d
121a
T5
87c
18bc
25ab
113d
T6
106bc
14cde
25a
118a-d
T7
105bc
14b-e
24abc
119abc
T8
89
10e
21d
122a
T9
131
26a
25a
104e
T10
117
17bc
24abc
105e
T11
111bc
15bcd
22bcd
117a-d
T12
109bc
12de
22cd
120ab
_____________________________________________________________________LSD (0.05)
22.1
3.87
1.91
4.9
Standard Dev.
15.3
2.68
1.32
3.78
CV
14.6
17.27
5.6
2.93

HeightRoot

PanicleDays to41

GREENHOUSE EXPERIMENTS:
Some growth parameters•________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________•CULTIVARS

•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Grain
Grain
14% M.C.
Component(g)(%)(Kg/ha)(Kg/ha)________________________________________________________________________
T1
25.2cd
91a
610a
4069a
T2
24.8cde88a
380b
2494bc
T3
24de
71c
272bc
1824bcd
T4
24de
71c
203cd
1501cde
T5
27bcd
91a
541a
3809a
T6
24.8cde71c
356b
2380bcd
T7
26.9bcd 74bc
304bc
2031bcd
T8
21.5e
56d
123d
817e
T9
36.9a
85ab
641a
4285a
T10
34.7
80abc
380b
2551
T11
29.4b
56d
200cd
1385deT12
27.8bc
42e
110d
736e
______________________________________________________________________LSD (0.05)
3.22
11.5
119.3
899.2
Standard Dev.
2.23
7.97
82.6
622.8
CV
8.19
10.92
24.0
26.8

1000

Filled

Yield

Yield

42

- 33 ３３

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Rainfall and Temperature Data during
NERICA Cultivars Trial – Short rains 2005---------------------------------------------------------------------Temperature (0C)

MonthsRainfall(mm)--------------------Min.
Max---------------------------------------•

August

143

21

28

•

September

167

20

30

•

October

353

18

28

•

November

96

19

31

•

December

83

22

31

•

January64
2128---------------------------------------------------------------------43

NERICA at Flowering – Maseno Site

44

- 34 ３
４

Rice Production in Africa: A Key to Promoting the Sub-Saharan Africa Food Security

NERICA 11 AT MATURITY

45

NERICA DISSEMINATION FIELD DAY AT
BUNGOMA, KENYA

46- 35 ３５

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

NERICA Growing in The Farmer Field in
Bungoma, Panicle Harvesting47

Response of NERICA Cultivars to Field
Water Deficit48- 36 ３
６

Rice Production in Africa: A Key to Promoting the Sub-Saharan Africa Food Security

Grain filling during drought stress

49

NERICA Yield 2005 at LBDAHigh Yielding NERICAs at Alupe -Busia 2004

3000.02500.0
WAB 450-11-1-1-P41-HB - N10

2000.0

WAB 450-11-1-3-P40-HB
Yield (kgs) 1500.0

WAB 450-11-1-3-P41-HB
WAB 450-11-2-BL1-DR2

1000.0

WAB 450-16-2-BL1-DR1
WAB 450-16-2-BL2-DV1 - N11

500.0
0.0
1
Varieties

50- 37 ３７

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Yield of the NERICAs at the Farmers
Field in Teso District

4

3.6
3.4
3.2

Yield (t/ha)

3

2.7

1.9
2

1

0
V2

V3

V7

V4

Kaigo

Cultivars

51

NERICAs at 52 DASE at LBDA Alupe
grown under different treatment of N

T1- 0 kg/ha

T3-N 60 kg/ha

T2-N 30 kg/ha

T4-N 90 kg/ha

52- 38 ３８

Rice Production in Africa: A Key to Promoting the Sub-Saharan Africa Food Security

High Yielding NERICAs
Maturity – 100 days
Yield – more than 4.0 t/ha

WAB 450-11-1-3-P40-HB

WAB 450-11-1-3-P41-HB

53

Effect of N on Yield - WAB 450-11-1-1-P41-HB (V1)and WAB-450-11-1-1-3-P40-HB (V2)
5

Yield t/ha

4

3

2

1

0
0N

30 N

60 N

90 N

Amount of N/ha Application
V1 Yield (t/ha)

V2 Yield (t/ha)
54- 39 ３９International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 82006 Long rains trials
Experiments are on going in all the four substations of the project, namely:• Botanic Garden at Maseno University,• Alupe field station of Lake Basin
Development Authority,• Kilombero Agricultural Training andResearch Institute at Ifakara, Morogoro,• Kenya Agricultural Research Institute,
Kibos.
• Uganda, National Agricultural Research
Organization – Ngeta.

55

Soya bean and Bambara Groundnut
Intercrop with NERICA Rice 21 das

56- 40 ４０

Rice Production in Africa: A Key to Promoting the Sub-Saharan Africa Food Security

Soya bean and Bambara Groundnut
Intercrop with NERICA Rice 42 das

57

NERICA - Alupe Experimental Plots - LBDA

58

- 41 ４１

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

NERICA Field Trials at Maseno 200659

NERICA Technical Review Team
Maseno Fields

60- 42 ４２

Rice Production in Africa: A Key to Promoting the Sub-Saharan Africa Food Security

NERICA 10 at Grain filling Stage, Maseno

61

GRAIN YIELD FOR SOME RAINFED
RICE CULTIVARS [WESTERN KENYA]
Variety
KAISO K23

Number of
Panicles/M2
452.5

Filled Grain
Rippening Ratio
(%)
77.0

1000 Grain
Weight
(g)
20.3

Yield
(Kg/ha)2323.0KR – 35

364.5

62.8

24.8

2527.0KR - 108

379.6

67.8

27.7

2527.5NERICA 1

235.6

85.7

30.0

3395.1NERICA 4

259.6

85.7

27.3

2578.5NERICA 10

205.4

92.8

26.7

3325.3

NERICA 11

296.9

86.5

30.2

4024.5

WAB 450-11-1-3-P41-HB

221.4

87.1

25.8

2898.1

WAB 450-11-2-BL1-DR1

193.8

82.2

31.8

3000.8PAKISTAN R3

378.7

73.9

27.6

3104.0PISHORI

459.6

67.8

26.8

2493.6

DOURADO

190.2

86.8

33.6

3035.9

CV

17.40

8.32

7.51

23.54

LSD 5%

89.34

11.23

3.52

1170.43

LSD 1%

121.42

15.27

4.79

62
1590.86- 43 ４３

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

NUTRITIONAL QUALITY OF NERICAs_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _SAMPLE TREATMENTPROTEIN ( % )_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _NERICAs POLISHED VS PARBOILED 10.2 vs 10.7
NERICAs
10.0 vs 10.9
GUINEAN VARIETY
9.4 vs 10.7
IMPORTED VARIETY*
7.7
STANDARD REF. (USDA)
8.1_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _TAIWAN & CHINA*
Source, ARI 2006
63

Intervention Strategy 1• NERICA varieties were developed for
rainfed or upland conditions; however,there is need to quantify the spectrum of
several varieties in cultivation with regard
to their water requirements for effective
production.
• However, physiological characteristics of
NERICA are not fully known and there isan urgent need to conduct research in
NERICA agronomic and physiologicalparameters geared to high productivity
under limiting water availability.
64- 44 ４
４

Rice Production in Africa: A Key to Promoting the Sub-Saharan Africa Food Security

Intervention Strategy 2• Establishing seed banks requires
elaborate information on theecophysiology of the donor plants,
especially with regard to overcoming
environmental constraints, since stress isa major limitation to crop production
worldwide.
• There is growing interest in identifying andselecting genotypes that will maintaingrowth and productivity under limited
water conditions.
65

Intervention Strategy 3• NERICA may need a shuttle adaptive
research approach in order to selectvarieties which are adaptable to several
regions of different agro-ecologicalstructures.
• Through this process varieties which canperform well in the Sub-Saharan Africa
can be produced or selected within a shorttime, thereby reducing the breeding
programme period.
66- 45 ４５

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8Intervention Strategy 4• In Sub-Saharan Africa presently, thegreatest need is to increase foodproduction above the population growthrate.
• However, this will not be achieved unlessfertilizer usage is increased and combinedwith higher yielding varieties and improved
crop management practices.
• The realization of this target also depends
on the improvement of the continent’s
infrastructure network.
67

Intervention Strategy 5• Weed control has been identified as afactor, reducing NERICA production in
East Africa, especially the Striga
hermonthica which causes up to 70%
loses in cereals.
• Identification of NERICA varieties that canwithstand the weeds’ effect will be
desirable to promote production.
• Striga is the main parasitic weed
devastating NERICA production in SubSaharan African.
68- 46 ４
６

Rice Production in Africa: A Key to Promoting the Sub-Saharan Africa Food Security

Intervention Strategy 6• In recent Africa Rice Congress (ARC) in
Tanzania, it was realized that Sub-SaharanAfrica has the lowest number of available
scientific expertise which is about 83 scientists
per million people, compared to 1100 scientist
per million in industrialized countries and 785
per million in Asia.
• At this level of scientific expertise in Africa, it isparamount that capacity-building programme
focusing on the development of a multidisciplinary researchers and extension staff isurgently needed.
69

Intervention Strategy 7• Lack of certified seeds is the main draw
back to releasing some of the highpotential NERICA varieties in Kenya.
• Efforts are now being made to bulk theseeds of selected NERICA lines forrelease to farmers by 2008 long rains
season but there is also a need to bring inprivate sector stakeholders in certified
seed production and marketing.
• Sasakawa-Global 2000 has played therole of seed production successfully in
Asia and Uganda, their experience is anasset in NERICA seed dissemination. 70- 47 ４７

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8Intervention Strategy 8• Pest and diseases evaluation in NERICA
fields should be carried out and the results
used to identify correct remedial measuresand development of necessary pesticides
and other crop protection chemicals
relevant to NERICA rice production.
• Harvesting and post-harvesting techniques
need to be surveyed and recommendation
made on best practices on processing andstorage.
71

Intervention Strategy 9• Value addition and milling requires quick accessto good quality mills to enhance profitability of
the rice produce by farmers in contrast to the
middle traders.
• Market surveys and identification of readymarket for the produce will also entice more
small-holder farmers to continue with riceproduction both for food security and cash crop.
• In Uganda farmers have earned up to Ush.
3,740,000 (about US$ 2,000) for NERICA
production per hectare.
• This earning has enables NERICA farmers tomeet several of their family obligations.
72- 48 ４８

Rice Production in Africa: A Key to Promoting the Sub-Saharan Africa Food Security

Post-harvest Activities Uganda

Rice Threshers
73

FINAL DESTINATION FOR RICE:
THE MARKET & THE TABLE

74- 49 ４９International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Benefits to Farmers• Benefits from rice growing have been
proven to be greater for farmers working ingroups than those working individually.
Such benefits include sharing labour andinformation and also better marketing.
• On-farm water harvesting after heavy rains
have also improved production to thefarmers involved.
75

Conclusion•••

The findings from the research strategies and upscaling of production technologies will be aresource and attribute to the performance andimplementation by various Ministry of Agriculture
extension services in different countries in theregion.
This will spirally lead to better natural resource
management practices and improved riceproduction, marketing and availability to rural andurban communities.
If coordinated well, then this will enhance the roleof NERICA in food security and poverty reduction
76
in the Sub-Saharan Africa.

- 50 ５０

Rice Production in Africa: A Key to Promoting the Sub-Saharan Africa Food Security

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTICCAE, Nagoya University
for invaluable Invitation
MASENO UNIVERSITY
for Space and Time
Many Organizations and Individuals
For Supporting my Research Activities
AUDIENCE
for Attention and Interaction
77

THANK YOUFOR
LISTENING
78- 51 ５１

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8ឋွࣖሉ
3WGUVKQP CPF #PUYGT 5GUUKQPRice Production in Africa: A Key to Promoting the Sub-Saharan Africa Food Security䜰䝣䝸䜹䛻䛚䛡䜛⡿䛾⏕⏘䠖䝃䝝䝷௨༡䜰䝣䝸䜹䛾㣗ᩱᏳ඲ಖ㞀䜢ᙉ໬䛩䜛䛯䜑䛾䜻䞊
John C. Onyango
Professor, Maseno University, Kenya
Visiting Professor, ICCAE, Nagoya University (at the time of presentation, October 2006)
ྖ఍䠖㻌 ὸ἟㻌 ಟ୍ྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫᅜ㝿ᩍ⫱༠ຊ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊
Chair person: Shuichi Asanuma, Professor, ICCAE, Nagoya University

Asanuma, Chair:Thank you very much for your general introduction of NERICA; on its
production, problems, and dissemination in Africa. I’m surprised to hear that
NERICA has such a potential to grow its yield up to 3 tones/ha with the farmers
skill. As you said in the conclusion, coordinating them well would make itpossible to improve the food security. I think this is important.
We are behind the schedule. Do you have any questions for Dr. Onyango?

Wakatsuki:
My name is Wakatsuki from Kinki University. Thank you very much foryour nice presentation. I am also extremely impressed by your presentation
and recognized, for realizing the green revolution in Africa, the basic
infrastructure is necessary.
May I ask you about your target of NERICA dissemination? Do you thinkfertilizer is the key? If the yield of NERICA or of any other rice is less than 4
tons/ha in the farmers’ fields, the use of fertilizer may not be productive.
Normally at that level, fertilizer use cannot be sustained due to its high cost.
The yield should be higher than 4 tons/ha. So, in that case, do you think whatstrategy should be adopted to increase the yield at the farmers’ fields? I thinkthat the green revolution would be possible when 4 tons or higher is realized in
the farmers’ yield, otherwise any fertilizer use can not be economic. This is
my opinion. Could I have your comment about that?

Onyango:Thank you very much for that question Dr. Wakatsuki. I think the fertilizer
use has been in high debate for a very long time. That kind of thinking is notnew. Actually, even when we are talking about the Green Revolution in Asia
that is, India and Pakistan, the fertilizer was a problem and so was the crop
production.
But I think the scientists who were dealing with the crop at that particulartime made the governments realize that if the aim was to increase production
then fertilizer had to be involved. If that (increased use of fertilizer) is going tobe the case, even though the farmers are poor, they are ready to offer labor on
their farms, so the government should come up with subsidy to bale them out toincrease NERICA production.

- 52 ５２

Rice Production in Africa: A Key to Promoting the Sub-Saharan Africa Food Security

The problem with the fertilizer is still there as at now we also haveenvironmentalists who are concerned with pollution factors caused by fertilizer
run-off from farm lands. However, this can be mitigated by having buffer
crops to take up run-off nutrient load before discharge into water bodies.
Since the subsidy worked for Green Revolution it is possible to employ thesame method to increase production. The countries affected with low riceproduction spends about US$ 1.5 billion to import rice, it follows that, if they
spend a fraction of that money to access fertilizer for farmers then they can
assist small holder producer increase production. The agricultural extension
staff will also help with safe environmental management of fertilizer usage.

Asanuma, Chair:
I will take one more question. No question? I have a question. You
showed us in your slides regarding intercropping of NERICA with Soya beans
and Bambara groundnuts. What is the purpose of the experiment in terms offarm management?

Onyango:Thank you.
The purpose of the experiment is to help with thereplenishment of the soil nitrogen, because the two crops are legumes, hence
good in nitrogen fixation at scientific level. But at community level, most
farmers we are dealing with are already intercropping Soya beans and Bambara
groundnuts with maize. Our experiments are therefore aimed at developing a
package for technology transfer. We want to have enough information for thistransfer so that we can win farmers’ confidence in using rice instead of maize
thereby increasing the production.

Asanuma, Chair:
If there is no other question, thank you very much, Professor Onyango.

- 53 ５３

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Profile䝆䝵䞁䞉C䞉䜸䝙䝱䞁䝂 John C. Onyango䝬䝉䝜኱Ꮫ⌮Ꮫ㒊㛗䞉ᩍᤵ
Professor, Dean of Faculty of Science, Maseno University, Kenya
Contact: Department of Botany and Horticulture, Faculty of Science,
Maseno University
Address: Private Bag, 40705, Maseno, Kenya
Email: jconyango@ yahoo.com

1986 ᖺ䜿䝙䜰䞉䝘䜲䝻䝡኱Ꮫ⌮Ꮫ㒊᳜≀Ꮫಟኈㄢ⛬ಟ஢䠄᳜≀⏕⌮Ꮫ䠅䚸1989 ᖺⱥᅜ䝃䝉䝑䜽䝇኱Ꮫ༤ኈㄢ⛬ಟ஢䠄స≀䞉᳜≀⏕⌮Ꮫ䠅䚹1986 ᖺ䛛䜙 1991 ᖺ䜎䛷䝘䜲䝻䝡኱Ꮫᩍဨ䚸1992 ᖺ䛛䜙 2001 ᖺ䜎䛷䝬䝉䝜኱Ꮫ᳜≀Ꮫ⛉㛗䚹䛭䛾ᚋ䚸ྠ኱Ꮫ⌮Ꮫ㒊᳜≀⏕⌮Ꮫᩍᤵ䛻ᑵ௵䛧䚸⌧ᅾ䛻⮳䜛䚹2004 ᖺ䛛䜙2008 ᖺ䜎䛷䝬䝉䝜኱Ꮫ⌮Ꮫ㒊㛗䜢ົ䜑䚸2006 ᖺ 8 ᭶䛛䜙 12 ᭶䜎䛷ྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫᅜ㝿ᩍ⫱༠ຊ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊ᐈဨᩍᤵ䜢ົ䜑䚸ྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫᒣෆ❶ᩍᤵ䚸ὸ἟ಟ୍ᩍᤵ䛸䛸䜒䛻ඹྠ◊✲䜢ᐇ᪋䚹
1993 ᖺ䚸1996 ᖺ䚸2000 ᖺ䚸2003 ᖺ䛻䛿䝗䜲䝒䞉䝞䜲䝻䜲䝖኱Ꮫ䜰䞊䜴䜱䞁䞉䝧䝑䜽ᩍᤵ䚸1995 ᖺ䛻䛿䝻䞁䝗䞁኱Ꮫ䝕䝙䝇䞉䝧䜲䜹䞊ᩍᤵ䛾䜒䛸䛷◊✲䜢⾜䛖䚹䝣䝹䝤䝷䜲䝖䞉䜰䝣䝸䜹ୖ⣭◊✲⪅䝥䝻䜾䝷䝮䛷⡿ᅜ䝹䜲䝆䜰䝘ᕞ䛾✄స◊✲ヨ㦂ሙ䚸䝸䝏䝱䞊䝗䞉䝕䝳䝘䞁ᩍᤵ䛾ୗ䛷䠕䛛᭶㛫䛻䜟䛯䜚◊✲䜢⾜䛖䚹䛣䜜䜎䛷䝗䜲䝒䞉䜰䝣䝸䜹Ꮫ⾡஺ὶ䠄DAAD䠅䚸䝗䜲䝒ᅜ㝿ᢏ⾡༠ຊ䠄GTZ䠅䚸䝗䜲䝒◊✲㈈ᅋ䠄DFG䠅䚸䜰䝣䝸䜹㧗ᆅ䜲䝙䝅䜰䝏䝤䠄AHI䠅䚸䝗䜲䝒㐃㑥ᩍ⫱◊✲┬䚸䝡䜽䝖䝸䜰†◊✲䜲䝙䝅䜰䝏䝤䠄Vic Res䠅䠄SIDA
IUCEA䠅䚸᪥ᮏ䛾ᅜ㝿༠ຊᶵᵓ䠄JICA䠅䚸䜎䛯䚸䜰䝣䝸䜹ே㐀䜚ᣐⅬ䠄AICAD䠅䛺䛹䛛䜙䜒◊✲䝣䜯䞁䝗䜢ᚓ䛶䛔䜛䚹䜸䝙䝱䞁䝂ᩍᤵ䛜⾜䛳䛯㔜せ䛺◊✲䛾୍䛴䛸䛧䛶䚸䝗䜲䝒㐃㑥ᩍ⫱◊✲┬䛛䜙◊✲㈝䜢ཷ䛡 BIOTA䛾ୗ䛷ᐇ᪋䛧䛯䚸䝁䝭䝳䝙䝔䜱䛾㈨※᭷ຠά⏝䛻㛵䛩䜛㧗౯್᳜≀䛾ಖ඲䛻㛵䛩䜛䝥䝻䝆䜵䜽䝖䛄ᮾ䜰䝣䝸䜹 E12 䝥䝻䝆䜵䜽䝖䠖ᮾ䜰䝣䝸䜹ᒣᯘ䛾᳜⏕䚸෌⏕䚸Ẹ᪘᳜≀Ꮫ䛅䛜ᣲ䛢䜙䜜䜛䚹⌧ᅾ䛿䚸AICAD 䛸 JICA 䛸䛜⾜䛳䛶䛔䜛 NERICA 䛾䜿䝙䜰ᅜෆᆅᇦ㐺ᛂᛶヨ㦂䛻䛚䛔䛶䚸≉䛻䚸ኳỈ✄స䚸᳜≀⏕⌮Ꮫ䚸⏕≀ከᵝᛶ䛻㛵䛩䜛◊✲䜢ពḧⓗ䛻⾜䛳䛶䛔䜛䚹⌧ᅾ䛾◊✲䛿䚸䜿䝙䜰䛻䛚䛡䜛
NERICA 䛾㐺ᛂヨ㦂䚸䛚䜘䜃䝡䜽䝖䝸䜰†ᆅᇦ䛻䛚䛡䜛䜿䝙䜰䛾ఏ⤫ⓗኳỈ✄సἲ䛾ᬑཬ◊✲䚹- 54 ５
４

Rice Production in Africa: A Key to Promoting the Sub-Saharan Africa Food Security

Academic career
Professor Onyango obtained his Bachelor of Science and Master of Science in Botany (Plant
Physiology) from the University of Nairobi, Kenya in 1982 and 1986 respectively. He later obtained his
Ph.D. in Crop/Plant Physiology from the University of Sussex, United Kingdom in 1989.

Professional career
Professor Onyango has had an illustrious career in University teaching, research and administration
since 1986 to date. He first taught at the University of Nairobi from 1986 to 1991. He then joined
Maseno University in 1992 to become Chairman of Department of Botany up to 2001. He rose throughthe academic ranks to become a Professor of Plant Physiology in the Faculty of Science a position heserves until to date. Professor Onyango was also Dean of the Faculty of Science from 2004 to 2008 at thesame university. He was a Visiting Professor from August to December 2006 at the International Centerfor Cooperation in Agricultural Education (ICCAE), Nagoya University conducting research withProfessor S. Asanuma in Professor Akira Yamauchi’s Laboratory.

Research Interests and Achievements
Professor Onyango in the past has been awarded several three-months research fellowship awards thatenabled him to carry-out distinguished research in Professor Erwin Beck’s Laboratory at the University of
Bayreuth, Germany in 1993, 1996, 2000 and 2003; Professor Denis Baker’s Laboratory at University of
London 1995; Nine-months sabbatical leave research in Professor Richard Dunand’s Laboratory at Rice
Research Station, Crowley, at Louisiana State University, USA. Sponsored by Fulbright Senior African
Scholars’ Program.
Professor Onyango’s outstanding research work is evidenced by his numerous publications in refereed
journals and the many research grants he has been awarded by distinguished organizations, among theGerman Academic Exchange for Africa (DAAD), German International Technical Cooperation (GTZ),
German Research Foundation (DFG) African Highland Initiative (AHI), German Federal Ministry of
Education and Research, Lake Victoria Research Initiative – (Vic Res) (SIDA IUCEA), JapaneseInternational Cooperation Agency, (JICA) and AICAD.
One important research initiatives he has undertaken is that of the conservation of high value plants for
efficient community utilization of resources a project that was sponsored by the German Federal Ministryof Education and Research, under the BIOTA – East Africa, E12 project on Vegetation, Regeneration andEthno-Botany of East African Mountain Forests.
Professor Onyango is currently an active researcher in the NERICA-rice research initiative promoted by
Japanese International Cooperation Agency (JICA), and AICAD and his research work has focused onrain-fed rice and plant physiology and biodiversity in general. His current research is on Adaptability
trials of NERICA in Kenya and Agronomic development of Kenya’s traditional rain-fed rice in Lake
Victoria region.

- 55 ５５➨䠎❶ ◊✲
Chapter 2

Research

Roles of Roots in Relation to Water Stress Tolerance of Crop᰿䛛䜙䜏䛯స≀䛾Ỉ䝇䝖䝺䝇⪏ᛶ㻌
Roles of Roots in Relation to Water Stress Tolerance of Cropᒣෆ㻌 ❶ 㻝㻖䞉≟㣫⩏᫂ 㻝䞉⊁㔝㯞ዉ 㻝䞉㻾㼛㼑㼘㻌㻿㼡㼞㼍㼘㼠㼍㻞䞉ᑠᕝᩔྐ 㻟ྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ኱Ꮫ㝔⏕࿨㎰Ꮫ◊✲⛉ 㻝䠗䝣䜱䝸䝢䞁䜲䝛◊✲ᡤ 㻞䠗⛅⏣┴❧኱Ꮫ 㻟(* ayama@ agr.nagoya-u.ac.jp)

せ㻌 㻌 ⣙㻌 స≀䛾⏕⏘ᛶ䜢つᐃ䛩䜛୺せᅉ䛾୍䛴䛿䚸Ỉ䛷䛒䜛䚹స≀䛜᱂ᇵ䛥䜜䛶䛔䜛ᅡሙ䛻䛚䛔䛶䛿䚸ᅵተ⎔ቃ䛿୍ᐃ䛷䛒䜛䛣䛸䛿䜐䛧䜝䜎䜜䛷䚸ᖖ䛻ኚື䛧䛶䛔䜛䚹䛥䜙䛻✵㛫ⓗ䛻䜒୙ᆒ୍䛷䛒䜛䚹䛣䛾䛣䛸䛿◊✲⪅䛾㛫䛷䛿䛳䛝䜚䛸ㄆ㆑䛥䜜䛶䛔䜛䛸䛿ゝ䛘䛪䚸Ỉ䝇䝖䝺䝇⪏ᛶ䛸స≀᰿⣔䛾Ⓨ㐩䛸ᶵ⬟䛸䛾㛵ಀ䜢⪃䛘䜛ୖ䛷䛿䚸䛯䛔䜈䜣㔜せ䛺どⅬ䛷䛒䜛䚹㻌 స≀䛜᱂ᇵ䛥䜜䛶䛔䜛ᅡሙ䛻䛚䛔䛶䛿䚸᱂ᇵᮇ㛫୰䚸㛗ᮇ䛻䜟䛯䛳䛶஝⇱䛒䜛䛔䛿㐣‵䝇䝖䝺䝇䛜⥆䛟ሙྜ䜘䜚䚸䜐䛧䜝஝⇱䛸㐣‵䛾㛫䛷ᅵተỈศ᮲௳䛜ኚື䛩䜛䛣䛸䛾᪉䛜ᐇែ䛻㏆䛔䛸⪃䛘䜙䜜䜛䚹䛣䛾䜘䛖䛺ኚື䛿䚸஝⇱䜔㐣‵䛾༢⊂䛾䝇䝖䝺䝇䛻ẚ䜉䚸᰿䛾Ⓨ⫱䛸ᶵ⬟䛻䛸䛳䛶䜘䜚ཝ䛧䛔䝇䝖䝺䝇せᅉ䛸䛧䛶ാ䛟ྍ⬟ᛶ䛜䛒䜛䚹㻌 䛣䛾ၥ㢟䜢䜲䝛䛻䛴䛔䛶⪃䛘䛶䜏䜛䚹ୡ⏺ⓗ䛻䜏䜛䛸䜲䝛᱂ᇵᆅᇦ䛾⣙༙ศ䛜ኳỈ⏣䠄rainfed lowland
rice field䠅䛷䚸℺₅タഛ䛜ᩚ䛳䛶䛔䛺䛔䚹䛣䛾ኳỈ⏣䛻䛚䛡䜛᭱኱䛾཰㔞ไ㝈せᅉ䛿䚸Ỉ䝇䝖䝺䝇䛷䛒䜛䚹ኳỈ⏣䛻䛿䚸῝䛥 20cm 䛒䛯䜚䛻◳┙ᒙ䛸䛔䛖୙㏱Ỉᒙ䛜Ꮡᅾ䛧䚸䛭䛾䛯䜑୍᫬ⓗ䛻‣Ỉ≧ែ䛸䛺䜛ሙྜ䛜䛒䜛䚹䛩䛺䜟䛱䚸◳┙ᒙ䜘䜚ୗ䛾ᚰᅵ䛿㏻ᖖ䚸‵₶≧ែ䛷䛒䜛䛜䚸◳┙ᒙ䜘䜚ୖ䛾సᅵ䛿୙ᐃᮇ䛺㝆㞵䛻䜘䛳䛶᎘Ẽⓗ䛸ዲẼⓗ᮲௳䜢⧞䜚㏉䛧䚸䛭䛾㝿䛻㉳䛣䜛Ỉ䝇䝖䝺䝇䛜⏕⏘ᛶ䛾పୗ䜢ᣍ䛟䚹䛣䛾䜘䛖䛻䚸ኳỈ⏣䛻䛚䛡䜛Ỉ䝇䝖䝺䝇䛿䚸⏿≧ែ䛷㉳䛣䜛༢⣧䛺஝⇱䝇䝖䝺䝇䛸䛿㉁ⓗ䛻␗䛺䜛䜒䛾䛷䛒䜛䚹䛥䜙䛻䛿䚸ୡ⏺ⓗ䛺Ỉ୙㊊䛻ᑐᛂ䛧䛶䚸₤₅タഛ䛜ᩚ䛳䛶䛔䜛Ỉ⏣䛻䛚䛔䛶䜒䚸⠇Ỉ᱂ᇵᢏ⾡䛾㛤Ⓨ䛜ᛴ䛜䜜䛶䛔䜛䛜䚸䛣䛣䛷䜒
ඹ㏻䛾ၥ㢟䛜Ꮡᅾ䛩䜛䚹㻌 䛣䛾䜘䛖䛺䚸᫬㛫ⓗ䞉✵㛫ⓗ䛻୙ᆒ୍䛺ᅵተ᮲௳ୗ䛷䚸䜲䝛᰿⣔䛿䛹䛾䜘䛖䛺ᙧ㉁䜢ලഛ䛩䜉䛝䛛䠛㻌 ⎔ቃ᮲௳䛻ᑐ䛧䛶཯ᛂ䛧䚸ᙧែ䜢ኚ໬䛥䛫䜛⬟ຊ䜢ྍረᛶ䛸࿧䜆䚹䛭䛣䛷䚸ⱼⴥ㒊䜘䜚ศ㓄䛥䜜䛯ගྜᡂ⏘≀䜢ຠ⋡䜘䛟฼⏝䛧䛶䚸ኚື䛩䜛ᅵተ⎔ቃ䚸䛸䛟䛻䝇䝖䝺䝇⎔ቃ䛻ᛂ⟅䛧䛶䚸ಶయ䛾ᡂ㛗䜢Ᏻᐃ䛥䛫䜛䜘䛖䛺⬟ຊ䜢᭷䛩䜛䚸䛩䛺䜟䛱ྍረᛶ䛾኱䛝䛔᰿⣔䛜䚸ᶵ⬟ⓗ䛻㧗䛔䛸⪃䛘䜛䛣䛸䛜䛷䛝䜛䚹䛧䛛䛧୍᪉䚸䛣䛾ྍረᛶ䛸䛔䛖ᙧ㉁䛿䚸㑇ఏᏛⓗ䛻䛿䛯䛔䜈䜣ᢅ䛔䛻䛟䛟䚸䛣䜜䜢䜎䛸䜒䛻ྲྀ䜚ୖ䛢䜛䜘䛖䛺⫱✀䝥䝻䜾䝷䝮䜒䛣䜜䜎䛷䛻䛿䛺䛛䛳䛯䚹䛧䛛䛧䛣䛾ᙧ㉁䛿䚸స≀䛾䝇䝖䝺䝇⪏ᛶ䛸ᐦ᥋䛻㛵㐃䛧䛶䛔䜛ྍ⬟ᛶ䛜㧗䛟䚸ὀ┠䛩䜛ᚲせ䛜䛒䜛䚹㻌 ᮏㄽᩥ䛷䛿䚸୺䛸䛧䛶➹⪅䜙䛜䛣䜜䜎䛷䛻⾜䛳䛶䛝䛯◊✲ᡂᯝ䜢䜒䛸䛻䚸ᅵተ⎔ቃ䛾୰䛷䚸䛸䛟䛻Ỉ䝇䝖䝺䝇⪏ᛶ䜢୰ᚰ䛻䚸స≀᰿䛾Ⓨ⫱䜔ᶵ⬟䛜ᯝ䛯䛩ᙺ๭䜢䚸ྍረᛶ䜢䜻䞊䝽䞊䝗䛻⪃䛘䛶䜏䛯䛔䚹- 59 ５９International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Roles of Roots in Relation to Water Stress Tolerance of Crop㻭㼗㼕㼞㼍㻌㼅㼍㼙㼍㼡㼏㼔㼕㻝㻖㻘㻌㼅㼛㼟㼔㼕㼍㼗㼕㻌㻵㼚㼡㼗㼍㼕㻝㻘㻌㻹㼍㼚㼍㻌㻷㼍㼚㼛㻝㻘㻌㻾㼛㼑㼘㻌㻿㼡㼞㼍㼘㼠㼍㻞㻌㼍㼚㼐㻌㻭㼠㼟㼡㼟㼔㼕㻌㻻㼓㼍㼣㼍㻟㻌 㻌
1

2

Graduate School of Bioagricultural Sciences, Nagoya University, Nagoya 464-8601, Japan;
Philippine Rice Research Institute, Maligaya, Science City of Muñ oz, Nueva Ecija, Philippines;
3
Akita Prefectural University, Akita 010-0195, Japan; * e-mail: ayama@ agr.nagoya-u.ac.jp

Abstract
Among the various soil conditions, the soil moisture effect is probably most commonly
recognized. Soil environment is rarely constant but continues to change and is heterogeneous inspace as well. These facts are quite important when the root development and function are analyzed
in relation to their roles in water stress. During cropping period, it may be rather common that soil
moisture conditions fluctuate between drought and excess in moisture than that the conditions
continue to be either of them. It is important to note that such fluctuation can be more stressful ascompared with singly consistent stress of either drought and excess in moisture on crop root
development and function. In case of rice, more than a half of areas planted with rice is rainfed
lowland field without irrigation. The most severe constraints to production there is water stress.
Under rainfed lowland conditions, a hardpan that is water impermeable tends to be formed
approximately 20 cm below soil surface, and thus waterlogged conditions can temporally appear. In
other words, subsoil below the hardpan is usually wet while the topsoil above the hardpan is often
exposed to frequent wet and dry cycles that are caused by irregular rainfall, and such water stress cancause substantial reduction in growth and yield of rice plants. As such, the water stress under rainfed
lowland conditions is essentially different from the simple drought stress under upland conditions.
Furthermore, global trend of water scarcity badly demands the development of water-saving riceproduction technology in irrigated rice fields, which however inherently contains the similar problemof water stress as rainfed lowlands. Then what kinds of root traits should rice plants possess undersuch heterogeneous soil environment in time and space? A root system of a crop plant is an
integration of component roots with dissimilar morphology, anatomy and possibly physiological
functions. They are different also in developmental responses to various environments. The ability ofthe plant to change its morphology as environmental conditions change is known as phenotypic
plasticity. The root system that is high in function may be defined as that developmentally responds
to environmental changes in a way that it stabilizes the whole plant growth, i.e., plastic root system.
Such trait is difficult to be dealt with genetically and thus has been rarely incorporated in any
breeding program. This paper aims to briefly review our research outputs with related areas on rootsystem development and function in relation to the stress tolerance, especially that of water stress, ofcrop plants.
Key Words
Aerobic rice, heterogeneity, irrigated lowland, plasticity, rainfed lowland, water saving production
Water stresses in rice fields and the roles ofroots for plant adaptation
It is believed that roots play important roles incrop adaptation to various environments (Wang etal., 2006; Wang and Yamauchi, 2006; Yamauchi etal., 1996), but no practical rice variety has beendeveloped based on root trait. It may be partiallybecause the root traits responsible for the rice plant
adaptation vary with the nature of the growing

environment. For example, under upland conditions
where soil moisture is available mainly in deep layer,
the desirable traits may be simple and clear; deep
and thick roots at least for vegetative growth. On theother hand, generally under field conditions, soil
environment is rarely constant but continues tochange and is heterogeneous in space. For example,
the topsoil of rainfed lowlands is often exposed tofrequent wet and dry cycles that are caused byirregular rainfall (Wade et al., 1999).

- 60 ６０Roles of Roots in Relation to Water Stress Tolerance of Crop

Irrigated rice fields with water-saving technology
such as aerobic rice and alternate wetting and drying
system (Bouman et al., 2005) also inherently containthe same nature of soil moisture environment as
found in rainfed lowlands, that is, the fluctuating
soil moisture but with less intensity and possibly
more frequency. Although we need careful
examination as to whether such fluctuations causeany ‘ drought’ stress, we assume that moisturefluctuation alone can be stressful for root
development and function. These may be understood
if we address simple questions as follows; Whatwould happen to the deep roots that developed in
response to drought when the soil is suddenly
waterlogged by rain or irrigation? What would
happen to plants when droughted if the root system
is shallow after being grown in waterlogged and O2
deficient soil? Then what kinds of root traits shouldrice plants possess under such heterogeneous soil
environment in time and space?

Desirable root traits under water stressconditions
Root plasticity
A root system of a crop plant is an integration ofcomponent roots with dissimilar morphology,
anatomy and possibly physiological functions. They
are different also in developmental responses tovarious environments. The ability of the plant tochange its morphology as environmental conditions
change is known as phenotypic plasticity (O’Toole
and Bland, 1987). The root system that is high infunction may be defined as the one thatdevelopmentally responds to environmental changes
in a way that it stabilizes the whole plant growth,which may be called as plastic root system.
Fig. 1 shows the root systems of Job’s tears(adapted to excess moisture conditions), Japanesebarnyard millet (adapted to both excess moisture anddry conditions), and Pearl millet (known to be
drought resistant) grown under waterlogged,
well-watered and droughted conditions. The rootsystems showed very sharp plasticity according totheir adaptation ability to soil moisture conditions.
For example, Job’s tears showed promoted rootsystem development under waterlogging andinhibited development under drought and pearl
millet’s root system was severely inhibited underwaterlogging but especially fine branching wasapparently promoted under drought, while the rootsystem of Japanese barnyard millet relatively

maintained the development under both extreme
conditions (Galamay et al., 1992).
In this aspect, we have accumulated experimental
evidences by comparing different crop species andvarieties, which show that the response of rootsystem to a certain soil environmental condition
largely determines the plant’s ability to adapt to thecondition. Other examples include sorghum grownunder high root-zone temperature (Pardales et al.,
1991; 1992), waterlogging (Pardales et al., 1991),
allelopatic influence (Pardales 1992), cassava underfluctuating soil moistures (Pardales et al., 1999;
Pardale and Yamauchi, 2003; Subere et al., 2009),
sweetpotato under high root-zone temperature(Pardales et al., 1999) and soil moisture fluctuations(Pardales et al., 2000), various food legumes under
different soil moistures and temperature (Mia et al.,1996), maize under heterogenous N distribution(Tanaka et al., 2000) and rice under water stress(Bañ oc et al., 2000a; b; Wang et al., 2009).
Fig. 2 shows the growth of rice varieties,
Nipponbare and KDML 105 (rainfed lowland
variety in North East Thailand) grown under soil
moisture gradients from wet to dry. We identified
KDML 105 as a variety that shows very sharp root
developmental plasticity in response to changing
soil moisture conditions (Bañ oc et al., 2000a; b).
This figure therefore strongly suggests that the root
plasticity may play quite important roles in the plant
growth in the wide range of soil moisture.
As such, the phenotypic plasticity, the ability ofroot traits to change developmentally andfunctionally in response to the changing conditions
was suggested to be one of the most important traits
for adaptation (Yamauchi et al. 1996). Such trait isdifficult to be dealt with genetically and thus has
been rarely incorporated in any breeding program.
We showed that in rice root system, thedevelopment of different component roots and theirplastic responses to drought are under different Q TL
control. Such Q TL were found also to differ with theintensities of water stress (Wang et al., 2005). We
further showed that root osmotic adjustment is oneof the physiological bases for the plasticity (Ogawa
and Yamauchi, 2006). Especially, the sugar
accumulation on root axes induced by water stress
was found to be closely associated with plastic
lateral root branching under the condition suggestingthat such responses may be one of the physiologicalbases of the plasticity exhibited by the root system(Ogawa et al., 2005).

- 61 ６１

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Fig. 1

Root system development of Job’s tears (Coix lacrima-jobi L.) (upper, 1, 2, 3), Japanesebarnyard millet (Echinochloa utilis) (middle, 4, 5, 6), Pearl millet (Pennisetum typhoideum L.)(bottom, 7, 8. 9) grown under waterlogged (left, 1, 4, 7), well-watered (center, 2, 5, 8) anddroughted (right, 3, 6, 9) conditions. (Galamay et al., 1992)

Nipponbare
Promoted
Inhibited

Dry

Wet

Dry

Wet

Fig. 2 Growth of rice varieties, Nipponbare (left) and KDML 105 (rainfed
lowland variety in North East Thailand) (right) grown under soil moisturegradients from wet to dry.

- 62 ６２

Roles of Roots in Relation to Water Stress Tolerance of Crop

With this paper, therefore, we propose that theplasticity is one of the key root traits that are
required for rice plants to adapt to various
environments with soil moisture fluctuation
including rainfed lowlands and irrigated lowlands
with water-saving production systems.

Identification of key root traits in rice
Our recent studies have been aiming at
evaluating the genetic variations in responses in dry
matter production, shoot growth and root systemdevelopment to constant drought stress and transientmoisture stress conditions (drought and O2
deficiency) to identify key root traits that contributeto plant adaptation to various intensities of drought
stress and fluctuating soil moisture stresses.

Constant drought stress
Fifty-four chromosome segment substitutionlines (CSSLs) derived from Nipponbare andKasalath parents provided by the Rice Genome
Research Center of the National Institute ofAgrobiological Sciences, Japan were used in thefield experiments for three years. We used awatertight experimental bed installed with line

source sprinkler system, which creates andmaintained various intensities of soil moisturestresses as shown in Fig. 3. Results showed thatthese CSSLs generally showed reduced plant height,
tillering and dry matter productions as the drought
intensified in both years, which were associated with
reduced photosynthesis and transpiration, andstomatal conductance. However, compared with
Nipponbare, CSSL45 and 50 relatively maintained
dry matter production with increasing drought stressdue to their ability to maintain or promote root
elongation and branching under the conditions.
Specifically, their growth in shoot and roots were
not different from Nipponbare at 40% and above insoil moisture content (SMC), while the dry matterproduction and total root length in those CSSLs
peaked around 30-35 % of SMC. Under severe
drought at 10 % of SMC or below, the extent ofshoot and root growth reductions were similar to
those of Nipponbare (Kanou et al., 2007; Yamauchi
et al., 2008). These results strongly suggest thatplastic root responses of rice genotypes may be oneof the key traits that contribute to plant adaptation tovarious intensities of water stress.

Fig. 3 Watertight experimental bed installed with line source sprinkler system, which creates andmaintained various intensities of soil moisture stresses.

- 63 ６３

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8Transient moisture stress
Two aerobic genotypes (UPLRi7 and NSICRc9),
one irrigated lowland (PSBRc82), Kasalath (indica)
and Nipponbare (japonica) CSSLs parents weregrown under transient moisture stress in a growthchamber for 2 weeks (one week under each moisturestress) (Suralta and Yamauchi, 2008). The transientmoisture stress treatments were drought to O2
deficient (stagnant) and stagnant to drought
conditions. Then, the 54 CSSLs were also evaluatedin similar manners.
Consistent genotypic differences were foundbetween aerobic and irrigated lowland genotypes inlateral root production responses to transientmoisture stresses (Suralta et al., 2008b). Undertransient stagnant to drought condition, the root trait
that mainly determined the genotypic differences
was the ability to maintain seminal root elongation
and branching of lateral roots along seminal root
axis, nodal root production and elongation. Undertransient drought to stagnant condition, thedifferences were mainly determined by greater
ability in maintaining seminal root elongation andnodal root production, which were exhibited byaerobic genotype. The seminal roots of aerobic
genotypes had the ability to enhance root
aerenchyma formation when subjected to stagnant
condition while the irrigated lowland genotype
completely lost such ability once droughted.
Kasalath showed much greater ability in lateral root
production under both transient moisture stresses
than Nipponbare. This indicates the potential
utilization of their CSSLs for precise identificationof desirable root traits with reduced effects ofgenetic confounding (Suralta et al., 2008b).
Among the 54 CSSLs, Line 47 was identified toshow no significant differences in shoot and root
growth with the recurrent parent Nipponbare under
non-stressed conditions but consistently exhibit
greater lateral root production under both transientconditions. Using this line in comparison with
Nipponbare, the key root traits observed withgenetically diverse rice cultivars and the CSSL asshown above were confirmed to contribute to better
adaptation through enhanced water uptake, stomatal
conductance, photosynthesis and dry matterproduction when grown in soil with fluctuating
moistures (Suralta et al., In press). Some of the traits
were found to be common with those identified for
aerobic and irrigated lowland genotypes grownunder constant drought and waterlogged conditions(Suralta and Yamauchi, 2008).

The selected CSSLs under constant drought andtransient moisture stresses are being used for further
production of near isogenic lines on the Q TLs to
examine quantitatively the physiological function of
the root plasticity for plant adaptation under constantdrought and transient moisture stresses as well as its
genetic regulation.

Conclusion
Roots undoubtedly play one of the key roles forcrop plants to grow and adapt to environments withabiotic stresses such as water stress. It is primarily
important to characterize to understand theenvironment and the nature of the stresses of thetarget area so that desirable traits required for thegrowth and adaptation can be specifically identified.
One typical example is the difference between
simple drought and soil moisture fluctuations undervarious rice production ecosystem. One of the key
traits we have so far identified is the developmental
plasticity of root system. We still need toaccumulate direct evidence on roles of root plasticity
in whole plant growth by producing near isogenic
line, chromosome segment substitution line, which
can also be useful for Q TL analysis. For developing
varieties that can be practically grown in the field,
evaluation on genotypes (Q TL) x environmental
interaction is essential in the target ecosystems.

References
Bañ oc, D. M., Yamauchi, A., Kamoshita, A., Wade,
L. J. and Pardales, Jr. J. R. 2000a. Dry matterproduction and root system development of ricecultivars under fluctuating soil moisture. Plant
Production Science 3 (2): 197-207.
Bañ oc, D. M., Yamauchi, A., Kamoshita, A., Wade,
L. J. and Pardales, Jr. J. R. 2000b. Genotypicvariations in response of lateral root development
to fluctuating soil moisture in rice. Plant
Production Science 3(3): 335-343.
Bouman, B.A.M., Peng, S., Castañ eda, A.R.,
Visperas, R.M., 2005. Yield and water use of
irrigated tropical aerobic rice systems. Agric.
Water. Manage. 74, 87-105.

- 64 ６４

Roles of Roots in Relation to Water Stress Tolerance of Crop

Galamay, T. O., A. Yamauchi, T. Nonoyama and Y.
Kono. 1992. Acropetal lignification in cereal
nodal root axes as affected by different soil
moisture conditions. Japanese Journal of Crop
Science. 61:511-517.

Pardales, J. R. Jr, Y. Kono and A. Yamauchi. 1992.
Epidermal cell elongation in sorghum seminalroots exposed to high root-zone temperature.
Plant Science. 81:143-146.

Kanou, M., Y. Inukai, H. Kitano and A. Yamauchi.
2007. Identification of key root traits foradaptation of rice genotypes to various intensities
of water stress. In the Proceedings of The 2nd
International Conference on Rice for the Future,
5-9 November 2007, Bangkok, Thailand. pp.
216-220.
Mia, M. W., Yamauchi, A. and Kono, Y. 1996.
Plasticity in taproot elongation of several foodlegume species. Japanese Journal of Crop Science.
65:368-378.

Pardales, J. R. Jr, Y. Kono, A. Yamauchi and M.
Iijima. 1992. Seminal root growth in sorghum(Sorghum bicolor) under allelopatic influencesfrom residues of taro (Colocasia esculenta).
Annals of Botany. 69:493-496.
Pardales Jr., J. R. and A. Yamauchi 2003.
Regulation of root development in sweetpotato
and cassava by soil moisture during theirestablishment period. Plant and Soil. 255:
201-208.

Ogawa, A., C. Kawashima and A. Yamauchi 2005.
Sugar accumulation along the seminal root axis,
as affected by osmotic stress in maize:a possible
physiological basis for plastic lateral root
development. Plant Prod. Sci. 8 : 173-180.
Ogawa, A. and A. Yamauchi 2006. Root Osmotic
Adjustment under Osmotic Stress Conditions in
Maize Seedlings. 1. Transient response of growth
and water relations in roots to osmotic stress.
Plant Prod. Sci. 9 : 27-38.
O’Toole, J. C. and W. L. Bland. 1987. Genotypicvariation in crop plant root systems. Advance inAgronomy. 41: 91-145.

Subere, J. O. Q ., Bolatete, D, Bergantin, R., Pardales,
A., Belmonte, J. J., Mariscal, A., Sebidos, R. andYamauchi, A. 2009. Genotypic Variation in
Responses of Cassava (Manihot esculenta Crantz)
to Drought and Rewatering. I. Root System
Development. Plant Production Science 12 (4):462-474.
Suralta, R. R. and Yamauchi, A. 2008. Root growth,aerenchyma development, and oxygen transport
in rice genotypes subjected to drought andwaterlogging. Environmental and Experimental
Botany 64:75–82.

Pardales Jr., J. R., Bañ oc, D. M., Yamauchi, A.,
Iijima M. and Kono, Y. 1999. Root systemdevelopment of cassava and sweetpotato during
early growth stage as affected by high root zone
temperature. Plant Production Science. 2 (4):247-251.

Suralta. R. R., Inukai, Y. and Yamauchi, A. 2008a.
Genotypic variations in responses of lateral root
development to transient moisture stresses in ricecultivars. Plant Production Science. 11: 324-335.

Pardales Jr. J. R., Bañ oc, D. M., Yamauchi, A.,
Iijima M., and Esquibel, C. B. 2000 The Effect ofSoil Moisture Fluctuation on Root Development
During the Establishment Phase of Sweetpotato.
Plant Production Science 3(2): 134-139.
Pardales, J. R. Jr, Y. Kono and A. Yamauchi. 1991.
Response of the different root systemcomponents of sorghum to incidence ofwaterlogging. Environmental and Experimental
Botany. 31:107-115.

Pardales, J. R. Jr, A. Yamauchi and Y. Kono. 1991.
Growth and development of sorghum roots after
exposure to different periods of a hot root-zone
temperature. Environmental and Experimental
Botany. 31:397-403.

Suralta, R. R., Inukai Y. and Yamauchi, A. 2008b.
Utilizing chromosome segment substitution lines(CSSLs) for evaluation of root responses undertransient moisture stresses in rice. Plant
Production Science 11: 457-465.
Suralta, R. R., Inukai, Y. and Yamauchi, A. Dry
matter production in relation to root plastic
development, oxygen transport and water uptake- 65 ６５

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8of rice under transient soil moisture stresses.
Plant and Soil (In Press)

Wang, H., Siopongco, J. D. L. C, Wade, L. J. andYamauchi, A. 2009. Fractal Analysis on Root
Systems of Rice Plants in Response to DroughtStress. Environmental and Experimental Botany.
65: 338-344.

Tanaka, S., Yamauchi, A., Yano K., Iijima, M. and
Tatsumi, J. 2000. Functional significance of root
developmental plasticity in nitrogen acquisitionin maize. Root Research 9: 167-171. (InJapanese)

Wang, H., and Yamauchi, A. 2006. Growth andfunction of roots under abiotic stress soils. In B.
Huang ed., Plant-Environment Interactions 3rd ed.
CRC Press, Taylor and Francis Group, LLC, New
York. 271-320.

Wade, L. J., Fukai, S., Samson, B.K., Ali, A. and
Mazid, M.A. 1999. Rainfed lowland rice:Physical environment and cultivar requirements.
Field Crops Res. 64: 3-12.
Wang, H., Y. Inukai, A. Kamoshita, L. J. Wade, J. D.
L. C. Siopongco, H. Nguyen and A. Yamauchi.
2005. Q TL analysis on plasticity in lateral root
development in response to water stress in therice plant. In The Proceedings of the World Rice
Research Conference. Tsukuba, Japan. Toriyama,K., K. L. Heong and B. Hardy (eds.) Rice is life:
scientific perspectives for the 21st century. pp.
464-469.
Wang, H., Y. Inukai and A. Yamauchi. 2006. RootDevelopment and Nutrient Uptake. Critical
Reviews in Plant Sciences. 25:279–301.

Yamauchi, A., Pardales Jr, J. R. and Kono, Y. 1996.
Root system structure and its relation to stress
tolerance. In Dynamics of roots and nitrogen in
cropping systems of semi-arid tropics (eds. Ito, O.
et al.). pp. 211-233. Japan International ResearchCenter for Agricultural Sciences, Tsukuba.
Yamauchi, A., Inukai, Y., Kano, M., Suralta, R.,
Ogawa, A., Kobayashi K. and R. Serraj. 2008.
Role of roots for stabilizing rice production underwater stress conditions. In The Proceedings of the
5th International Crop Science Congress, April
13-18, 2008, Jeju, Korea.

- 66 ６６

Roles of Roots in Relation to Water Stress Tolerance of Crop

Roles of roots in relation to water
stress tolerance of crop

Akira Yamauchi
Graduate School of Bioagricultural Sciences,
Nagoya University

Characteristics of crop-grown fields
Heterogeneity
x in spaceresource distribution

x in timemoisture fluctuation- 67 ６７

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Soil moisture and root system development

Source:Galamay et al. 1992.
Jpn. J. Crop Sci. 61:494-502.

Root system structure of rice and maize

Source:Yamauchi et al. 1987.
Jpn. J. Crop Sci. 56:608-617;
Yamauchi et al. 1987.
Jpn. J. Crop Sci. 56:618-631.

- 68 ６８

Roles of Roots in Relation to Water Stress Tolerance of Crop

Characteristics of rice ecosystem

Rice roots response to soil moisturefluctuation
0

0

IR20

20
30
40

20
30
40

50

50
0

100
200
300
-1
)
Specific root length (m g

400

0

0

Depth (cm)

10

20
30

20
30
40

50
0

100
200
300
-1
)
Specific root length (m g

50
0

400

0

100
200
300
-1
)
Specific root length (m g

4000

M ahsuri

KDML10510
Depth (cm)10Depth (cm)400

IR62266

40

20
30
40

20
30
40

50
0

100
200
300
-1
)
Specific root length (m g

50
0

400

0

100
200
300
-1
)
Specific root length (m g

400

0IR58821

IR5256110Depth (cm)10Depth (cm)

100
200
300
-1
)
Specific root length (m g0

CT 999310

Depth (cm)

NSG19

10
Depth (cm)Depth (cm)

10

20
30
40

20
30
40

50
0

100
200
300
-1
Specific root length (m g
)

400

50
0

100
200
300
-1
Specific root length (m g)

400

Source: Azhiri-Sigari et al. 2000. Plant Prod. Sci. 3, 180-188.

- 69 ６９

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Soil moisture fluctuations and root elongation

Source:Bañ oc et al. 2000.
Plant Prod. Sci. 3 (2): 197-207.

Soil moisture fluctuation and lateral root development

Table 4. Branching density of lateral roots in four rice cultivars grown under well-watered and soil
submerged-droughted-rewatered conditions (Exp. 2).
Cultivars/
Growth Period
Growing
Soil Submergence
Drought
Rewatering
Conditions/
Branching Density of 1OLRs
Branching Density of 1OLRs
Branching Density of 1OLRs% of Control
Total
L-typeS-typeTotal
L-typeS-typeTotal
L-typeS-type(cm-1)(cm-1)(cm-1)(cm-1)(cm-1)(cm-1)(cm-1)(cm-1)(cm-1)
IRAT109:
WW
13.1
3.6
9.5
12.4
3.4
9
12.9
3.5 a
9.4 b
S-D-Rw
14.3
3.2
11.1
13.5
2.9
10.6
14.7
1.4 b
13.3 a% of Control 109.2 ns
88.9 ns
116.8 ns108.9 ns85.3 ns117.8 ns
114.0 ns
40.0*
141.5*
Dular:
WW
16
4
12
13.2
2.2
11
8.3 b
0.64 b
7.7 b
S-D-Rw
17.2
3.2
14
14.7
1.8
12.9
19.7 a1.6 a18.1 a% of Control 107.5 ns
80.0 ns
116.7 ns111.4 ns
81.8 ns117.3 ns237.3*
250.0**
235.1**KDML105:WW
13.8 b
2.6
11.2 b
10.3
1.1 b
9.2
9.8
0.33 b
9.5
S-D-Rw
18.5 a2.7
15.8 a
10.3
2.5 a
7.8
10.7
1.3 a
9.4
% of Control
134.0*
103.8 ns141.1*
100.0 ns 227.3**
84.8 ns109.2 ns 393.9**
98.9 ns
Honenwase:
WW
15.6
3.0 b
12.6
14.5
2.6 a
11.9
8.9 b
0.62 b
8.3 b
S-D-Rw
17.2
4.4 a
12.8
11.2
1.6 b
9.6
14.0 a1.7 a12.3 a% of Control 110.2 ns
146.7*
101.6 ns
77.2 ns
61.5*
80.7 ns157.3*
274.2**
148.2*For abbreviations, legend and statistical significance, see Tables 1 and 3 for details.

Source:Bañ oc et al. 2000. Plant Prod. Sci. 3(3): 335-343.

- 70 ７０Roles of Roots in Relation to Water Stress Tolerance of Crop

Phenotypic Plasticity; dynamic aspectsof root system sturucture

Ability of a genotype toalter phenotype in response
to environment
x Soil moisture o lack, excess,fluctuate
x Soil temperature
x Chemical substances
x Nutrient distribution
x Microorganism

Root osmotic adjustment 1
10095┦ᑐྵỈ⋡㻌㻔㻑㻕

Water relation of elongation
portions of seminal root (maize)

90
85
80

-0.08MPa-0.13MPa-0.41MPa-0.89MPa0-0.5

ᾐ㏱䝫䝔䞁䝅䝱䝹㻌㻔㻹㻼㼍㻕

Water potential of mediumỈ䝫䝔䞁䝅䝱䝹㻌㻔㻹㻼㼍㻕

75

-1

-0.5
-1
-1.5

0
0

Source: Ogawa and Yamauchi 2006 Plant Prod. Sci. 9 (1): 27-38.

- 71 ７
１

㻝

㻝㻜

㻝㻜㻜
2

㻝㻜㻜㻜
6

12 24
㻔᫬㛫㻕

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Root osmotic adjustment 2

0.5⭾ᅽ㻌㻔㻹㻼㼍㻕

Change in turgor in relation
to root elongation

0
0

1

10

100

1000

100

1000

䝇䝖䝺䝇ฎ⌮ᚋ᫬㛫䠄ศ䠅

Water potential of medium-0.13MPaఙ㛗㏿ᗘ㻌㻔 P㼙㻌ศ 㻙㻝 㻕

-0.08MPa

50

0

-50

-0.41MPa-0.89MPa0110䝇䝖䝺䝇ฎ⌮ᚋ᫬㛫㻌㻔ศ㻕

02

Source: Ogawa and Yamauchi 2006 Plant Prod. Sci. 9 (1): 27-38.

6

12 24
㻔᫬㛫㻕

CT9993 vs IR62266•Japonica, early maturity•Avoidance strategy/responsive•Relies on extraction of more water•Capacity to penetrate the hardpan•Capacity to elongate roots at depth•Weak root signal in stress•QTLs for deep thick roots•Leaf proteins increase in abundance under stress•Specific adaptation to some drought conditions•Indica, early maturity•Tolerance strategy/stable•Relies on regulation of water loss
•Osmotic adjustment ability•Stomatal conductance regulation•Strong root signal in stress•QTLs for osmotic adjustment•Leaf proteins decrease in abundance under stress•General adaptation over environments with stable yields

Source: Siopongco et al. 2006. Plant Prod. Sci. 9 (2): 141-151.

- 72 ７２

Roles of Roots in Relation to Water Stress Tolerance of Crop

Genetic background for plasticity

䠄䠭䠰䠨䠅

Source: Wang et al. 2005. In The Proceedings of the World Rice Research
Conference. Tsukuba, Japan. Toriyama et al. (eds.) Rice is life: scientificperspectives for the 21st century. pp. 464-469.

QTL identified for root
plasticity traits- 73 ７３

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Soil moisture graduation•Functional significance ofplasticity•Control and stress?

Soil moisture fluctuation
䝉䞁䝃䞊䠍

ᅵተྵỈ⋡

㻑

䝉䞁䝃䞊䠎

㻟㻡

䝉䞁䝃䞊䠏

㻟㻜

䝉䞁䝃䞊䠐

㻞㻡

䝉䞁䝃䞊䠑

㻞㻜
㻝㻡

- 74 ７
４

㻞㻞
㻦㻜㻜

㻞㻜
㻦㻜㻜

㻝㻤
㻦㻜㻜

㻝㻢
㻦㻜㻜

㻝㻠
㻦㻜㻜

㻝㻞
㻦㻜㻜

㻝㻜
㻦㻜㻜

㻤㻦㻜
㻜

㻝㻜
᫬㛫

Roles of Roots in Relation to Water Stress Tolerance of Crop

Chromosome segment substitution lines
for rice

Source: Rice Genome Resource Center, National Institute of Bioagricultural Science

Kasalath and KDML 105
Kasalath㻷㻰㻹㻸㻝㻜㻡

- 75 ７５

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Dry matter production under soil moisture gradient

᪥ᮏᬕ
䜹䝃䝷䝇
䠧䠠䠩䠨

㻤㻜

㻤㻜㻚㻜
㻣㻜㻚㻜
㻢㻜㻚㻜
㻡㻜㻚㻜
㻠㻜㻚㻜
㻟㻜㻚㻜
㻞㻜㻚㻜
㻝㻜㻚㻜
㻜㻚㻜

㻣㻜

᪥ᮏᬕ

㻢㻜

䜹䝃䝷䝇

㻡㻜

䠯䠨䠐䠑

㻠㻜
㻟㻜

㻜

㻝㻜

㻞㻜

㻟㻜

㻠㻜

㻡㻜

㻢㻜

ᅵተྵỈ⋡䠄

㻞㻜
㻝㻜
㻜

㻜

㻝㻜

㻞㻜

㻟㻜

㻠㻜

㻡㻜

㻢㻜

㻿㼛㼕㼘㻌㼙㼛㼕㼟㼠㼡㼞㼑䠄㻑

Screening the lines that clearly differ from Nipponbaqre
Source: Kanou et al. 2007. In the Proceedings of The 2nd International Conference on Rice for the Future, 5-9 November 2007,
Bangkok, Thailand. pp. 216-220.

Tillering under soil moisture gradient᪥ᮏᬕ㻷㼍㼟㼍㼘㼍㼠㼔
⣔⤫䠏䠐␒

㻡㻜
㻠㻜
㻟㻜
㻞㻜
㻝㻜
㻜

㻝㻜

㻞㻜

㻟㻜

ᅵተྵỈ⋡䠄䠂䠅㻠㻜㻡㻜ศ 䛢 䛴 ᩘศ 䛢 䛴 ᩘ㻜᪥ᮏᬕ㻷㼍㼟㼍㼘㼍㼠㼔
㻷㻰㻹㻸㻝㻜㻡

㻡㻜
㻠㻜
㻟㻜
㻞㻜
㻝㻜
㻜

ศ 䛢 䛴 ᩘ

㻡㻜
㻠㻜
㻟㻜
㻞㻜
㻝㻜
㻜

᪥ᮏᬕ
㻷㼍㼟㼍㼘㼍㼠㼔
⣔⤫䠐䠑␒

㻜

㻝㻜

㻞㻜

㻟㻜

ᅵተྵỈ⋡䠄䠂䠅

- 76 ７
６

㻠㻜

㻡㻜

㻜

㻝㻜

㻞㻜

㻟㻜

ᅵተྵỈ⋡䠄䠂䠅

㻠㻜㻡㻜Roles of Roots in Relation to Water Stress Tolerance of Crop

Rooting under soil moisture gradient᪥ᮏᬕ㻷㼍㼟㼍㼘㼍㼠㼔⣔⤫䠏䠐␒㻠㻡㻜⠇ ᰿ ᩘ 䠄ᮏ 䠅⠇ ᰿ ᩘ 䠄ᮏ 䠅⠇ ᰿ ᩘ 䠄ᮏ 䠅

㻡㻡㻜

㻡㻡㻜

᪥ᮏᬕ
㻷㼍㼟㼍㼘㼍㼠㼔
㻷㻰㻹㻸䠍䠌䠑

᪥ᮏᬕ㻷㼍㼟㼍㼘㼍㼠㼔
⣔⤫䠐䠑␒

㻠㻡㻜

㻟㻡㻜

㻟㻡㻜

㻞㻡㻜

㻞㻡㻜

㻝㻡㻜

㻝㻡㻜

㻤㻜㻜
㻡㻡㻜
㻟㻜㻜
㻡㻜

㻡㻜

㻡㻜
㻜

㻝㻜

㻞㻜

㻟㻜

㻠㻜

㻜

㻡㻜

㻝㻜

㻞㻜

㻟㻜

㻠㻜

㻜

㻡㻜

ᅵተྵỈ⋡䠄㻑䠅

ᅵተྵỈ⋡䠄㻑䠅

㻝㻜

㻞㻜

㻟㻜

㻠㻜

㻡㻜

ᅵተྵỈ⋡䠄㻑䠅

Branching under soil moisture gradient

n=3

㻞㻡

ᖹᆒ
8.8
13.7

㻞㻜
㻝㻡
㻝㻜

㻞㻜
㻝㻡
㻝㻜

㻜

㻝

㻞

㻟

㻠

㻡

㻢

㻣

㻤

㻥

㻜

㻝㻜 㻝㻝䡚

㻜

㻝

㻞

㻟

㻸ᆺഃ᰿ᩘ

㻿㻸㻠㻡

㻟㻜

‵₶༊
஝⇱༊

n=3

㻞㻡

㻠

㻡

㻢

㻣

㻤

㻥

㻝㻜 㻝㻝䡚

㻸ᆺഃ᰿ᩘ

⣔⤫45␒

ᖹᆒ
7.7
14.3

㻝㻡
㻝㻜

ᖹᆒ
6.1
14.8

‵₶༊
஝⇱༊

n=1

㻤
㻢
㻠
㻞

㻡

㻜

㻜
㻜

㻝

㻞

㻟

㻠

㻡

㻢

㻸ᆺഃ᰿ᩘ

㻣

㻤

㻥

㻝㻜 㻝㻝䡚

n=2

㻝㻢

‵₶༊
஝⇱༊

ᖹᆒ
7.6
8.6

㻥

㻝㻜 㻝㻝䡚

㻝㻞
㻤

㻜

㻞

㻠

㻢

㻤

㻝㻜

㻝㻞

㻸ᆺഃ᰿ᩘ

- 77 ７
７

㻜
㻜

㻝

㻞

㻟

㻠

㻡

㻢

㻸ᆺഃ᰿ᩘ

㻷㻰㻹㻸㻝㻜㻡
㻝㻜

ษ᩿᰿ᩘ

㻞㻜

㻞㻜

㻠

㻡

㻜

㻿㻸㻟㻠
⣔⤫34␒

‵₶༊
஝⇱༊

n=3

㻞㻡

㻡

ษ᩿᰿ᩘ

ᖹᆒ
5.8
14.1

㻷㼍㼟㼍㼘㼍㼠㼔
㻟㻜

ษ᩿᰿ᩘ

ษ᩿᰿ᩘ

‵₶༊
஝⇱༊

ษ᩿᰿ᩘ

᪥ᮏᬕ
㻟㻜

㻝㻠

㻝㻢

㻝㻤 㻞㻜䡚

㻣㻤International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Root system development under soil
moisture gradient᪥ᮏᬕ㻷㼍㼟㼍㼘㼍㼠㼔
⣔⤫䠏䠐␒

㻝㻜㻡㻚㻜

㻢㻡㻚㻜
㻠㻡㻚㻜

㻞㻡㻜㻚㻜
㻞㻜㻜㻚㻜

㻤㻡㻚㻜

㻝㻡㻜㻚㻜

㻢㻡㻚㻜

㻝㻜㻜㻚㻜

㻠㻡㻚㻜
㻞㻡㻚㻜

㻞㻡㻚㻜

㻡㻜㻚㻜

㻡㻚㻜

㻡㻚㻜
㻜

㻝㻜

㻞㻜

㻟㻜

㻠㻜

㻡㻜

᪥ᮏᬕ
㻷㼍㼟㼍㼘㼍㼠㼔
㻷㻰㻹㻸䠍䠌䠑⥲ ᰿ 㛗 䠄䡉 䠅㻤㻡㻚㻜⥲᰿㛗䠄䡉䠅⥲ ᰿ 㛗 䠄䡉 䠅

㻝㻜㻡㻚㻜

᪥ᮏᬕ
㻷㼍㼟㼍㼘㼍㼠㼔⣔⤫䠐䠑␒㻜ᅵተྵỈ⋡䠄㻑䠅

㻝㻜

㻞㻜

㻟㻜

㻠㻜

㻡㻜

ᅵተྵỈ⋡䠄㻑䠅

㻜㻚㻜
㻜

㻝㻜

㻞㻜

㻟㻜

㻠㻜

㻡㻜

ᅵተྵỈ⋡䠄㻑䠅

Water requirement by rice production- 3,000 to 5,000 liters of water to produce 1
kg of rice grains- 2 to 3 times more water than to produce 1
kg of wheat or maize grains.

- 78 ７８

Roles of Roots in Relation to Water Stress Tolerance of Crop

Water saving rice production
 Saturated soil culture (SSC)
Soil is kept as close to saturation as possible by shallow irrigation to obtainabout 1-cm floodwater depth a day after the disappearance of standingwater Alternate wetting and drying (AWD) system
Irrigation water is applied to obtain 2-5 cm floodwater depth after a certain
number of days (ranging 2-7 days) Thin-water-layer irrigation and draining depending on the development of rice
A thin standing water layer exists throughout the growing season, except fortransplanting, end of effective tillering, and at heading (flowering) stage
Aerobic rice

To grow rice like an irrigated upland crop such as wheat or maize , that is on nonpuddled, aerobic soil without standing water

Aerenchyma development under soil moisturefluctuations

R o o t P o ro sity ( % )25

Initial Drought stressed

30

7 d Drought stressed: 7 d O2 deficient
Root Porosity (%)

30
20
15
10
5
0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 1112 1314 1516 1718 1920 2122
Distance from the root base (cm)25

Initial Dought stressed
7 d Drought stressed: 7 d O2 deficient

20
15
10
5
0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10111213141516171819202122
Distance from the root base (cm)Source:Suralta and Yamauchi 2008.
Environ Exp Bot 64:75–82.

- 79 ７９

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Aerenchyma development: genotypic difference

Kasalath
Droughted (Initial)
Drought-stagnant
Root Porosity (%)

Root Porosity (%)

Nipponbare
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112 13141516 171819 20212223 2425

60
55
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0

Droughted (Initial)
Drought-stagnant

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011 1213 1415 1617 1819 2021 2223 2425

Distance from the root base (cm)Distance from the roots base (cm)line 47
Droughted (Initial)
Drought-stagnant

Root Porosity (%)

Root Posority (%)

line 5
60
55
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0

60
55
50
45
40
35
30
25
20
15
10
5
0

Droughted (Initial)
Drought-stagnant

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11121314 15161718 19202122 232425

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011 1213 1415 16 1718 1920 2122 2324 25

Distance from the root base (cm)Distance from the root base (cm)

Root porosity along seminal root axis selected lines and parents
under transient drought stressed-stagnant conditions.

500

Well Aerated (7 DAP)

450

Stagnant (7 DAP)

400

Continuously Well Aerated (14 DAP)

350
300

line 43

500

Well Aerated (7 DAP)

450

Stagnant (7 DAP)

400

Continuously Well Aerated (14 DAP)

350

Stagnant-Drought (14 DAP)

Cumulative Lateral Roots(no.)

Cumulative Lateral Roots (no.)

Lateral root development

Stagnant-Drought (14 DAP)

line 47

300

250

250

200

200

150

150

100

100

50
0

50
0

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112131415161718192021222324252627282930

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 101112131415161718192021222324252627282930

Distance from the root base (cm)Distance from the root base (cm)

Lateral root development along seminal root axis of selected lines and parents
under transient stagnant-drought stressed conditions.
Source: Suralta et al. 2008. Plant Prod. Sci. 11: 457-465.

- 80 ８０Roles of Roots in Relation to Water Stress Tolerance of Crop

Experiment on drought responses at IRRI

Soil heterogeneity-root signal

Root signal experimentseminal and nodalroots

n o d a lrootspetoridishdeflector
pipe(inner)pot(outer)Pot showing nodal roots
growing toward outer container- 81 ８１International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Stomatal response to soil drought

Source:Siopongco et al. 2008.
Plant Prod. Sci. 11: 28-41.

Confirmation by field experiment- 82 ８２Roles of Roots in Relation to Water Stress Tolerance of Crop

Root signal

Source: Siopongco et al. 2009. Plant Prod. Sci. 12 (1): 17-28.

Stomatal response to waterlogging in wheat㻿㼠㼛㼙㼍㼠㼍㼘㻌㼞㼑㼟㼕㼟㼠㼍㼚㼏㼑

㻠
㻟㻚㻡

↓ฎ⌮
㐣‵

㻟
㻞㻚㻡
㻞
㻝㻚㻡
㻝
㻜㻚㻡

㼕㼚
㼓
㻿㼜
㼞
㼑㻌

㼁㻺
㻵㻯
㼁㻸
㻹

㻯㼔
㼕㼚
㼑㼟

㼓㼑㼚㼛㼠㼥㼜㼑

㎰
ᯘ
㻟㻤
ྕ

㎰
ᯘ
㻡㻜
ྕ

䜲
䝽
䜲
䝜䝎
䜲
䝏
䛿
䛴
䜋
䛣
䜐
䛞

୰
ᅜ
㻝㻠
㻥

㎰
ᯘ
㻢㻝
ྕ

㻜

Source: Okada et al. 2007 Root Research 16(4):191- 83 ８３

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Further research 1•••

Direct evidence on roles ofroot plasticity in whole plant
growth䊻Near isogenic line,
chromosome substitution lines
QTL analysis on root plasticity
Gene identification

Further research 2•

Understanding of ecosystem and environmentof target area
䊻production and environment Whatis the real issue?
•

Strengthening of stress tolerance䊻Traits directly involved?
䊻Production and survival•

Towards production technology and genetic
improvement
䊻 ecophysiology to molecular breeding- 84 ８４Roles of Roots in Relation to Water Stress Tolerance of Cropឋွࣖሉ
3WGUVKQP CPF #PUYGT 5GUUKQP᰿䛛䜙䜏䛯స≀䛾Ỉ䝇䝖䝺䝇⪏ᛶ
Role of Roots in Relation to Water Stress Tolerance of Cropᒣෆ㻌 ❶㻌 㻌 Akira Yamauchiྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫᅜ㝿ᩍ⫱༠ຊ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊
Professor, Graduate School of Bioagricultural Sciences, Nagoya Universityྖ఍䠖㻌 ὸ἟㻌 ಟ୍㻌 Chair person: Shuichi Asanumaྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫᅜ㝿ᩍ⫱༠ຊ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊
Professor, ICCAE, Nagoya University

Asanuma, Chair:Thank you very much Professor Yamauchi. It is very fresh idea to me that
not only continuous drought is important but further important is fluctuation ofsoil moisture condition between drought and water stress, and response of plantroots to the fluctuated moisture conditions.
Do you have any questions?

Koyama:My name is Koyama from JIRCAS. You showed us about the waterrequirements. That of rice is higher, two or three times higher, than maize. I
think it’s O.K., but does that mean rice is not suitable for dry areas? If it’s notreally suitable, we should not promote it in those areas. What is the base ofthis calculation? Is this based on the normal practice, or?

Yamauchi:This value was cited from the work of the International Rice Research Institute.
This one, the water requirement of rice includes the evaporation from the paddy rice
field and the seepage of water to the deeper soil. This calculation is based on theirrigated rice production with continuously flooded conditions that we normallyknow especially in this country, Japan. We also have the data for maize that ofcourse are grown under upland conditions with sufficient irrigation for comparison.
Several years ago, I also tried to compare the water requirement and water use
efficiency that is the dry matter production ability per unit amount of water used.
And the rice was among all the cereal crops examined weakest to water shortage.
It requires water most among the major cereal species examined.
There is a very serious conflict of water usage for rice in industrial sectors andagriculture, and it is now happening especially in China and other developing
countries. So, we really have to try to reduce the water use. So, instead ofcontinuous flooding conditions, alternative technologies that can reduce water use
are being produced as we may not need continuous flooded conditions for riceproduction. Results of long-time experiment show that we can not avoid yield
penalty under wet-and-dry cycle conditions, which most of the water-saving
technologies so far proposed contain. So, we’re trying to find mechanisms as towhy the rice suffers from the yield penalty under the alternative wet-and-dry
irrigation system.

- 85 ８５International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Asanuma, Chair:
Any other questions? Professor Yamauchi, do you have any data or idea
about the difference in water requirements between upland rice and maize?
We are now talking about continuous flooded conditions that water requirementof rice may be four or five times higher than maize. But when waterrequirements are compared between upland rice and maize, which requires
more?

Yamauchi:Though I do not have data available for the comparison at the moment, I do
not think they are much different if grown under the same upland field
conditions. Dr. Onyango, do you have any idea which produces more dry
matter and requires more water?

Asanuma, Chair:
We ICCAE invited a researcher from KARI Kibos of Kenya early this year
who told us that during the drought conditions of the last year, the upland rice
NERICA grew better than the maize. She said, “I would think maybe the
NERICA rice is more tolerant to the fluctuation of soil moisture conditions, andof course it depends on the rainfall time of the regions”.

Onyango:I think from Professor Asanuma’s statement, some information was notprovided for the KARI Kibos statement on NERICA water requirement. The
trial was during the short rain season and the rainfall was erratic. However,there was heavy rainfall for about one week which flooded the fields. During
the floods, maize was affected more than rice and as a result the production ofmaize was reduced more than rice. Genotypically even upland rice will
recover faster than maize from the anoxia conditions imposed by short durationof flooding. Generally rice is relatively heavy feeder in terms of waterrequirements.

Asanuma, Chair:Thank you very much for your correction. If there is no other question, letme close this session. Thank you very much, Professor Yamauchi.

- 86 ８６

Roles of Roots in Relation to Water Stress Tolerance of Crop

Profileᒣෆ ❶ Akira Yamauchiྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ኱Ꮫ㝔⏕࿨㎰Ꮫ◊✲⛉ᩍᤵ
Professor, Graduate School of Bioagricultural Sciences, Nagoya University
Contact:

Graduate School of Bioagricultural Sciences
Nagoya University
Chikusa, Nagoya 464-8601, Japan
Tel: + 81-52-789-4022
Fax: + 81-52-789-4022
E-mail: ayama@ agr.nagoya-u.ac.jp

1987 ᖺྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ኱Ꮫ㝔㎰Ꮫ◊✲⛉༤ኈㄢ⛬‶ᮇ㏥Ꮫ䚹1988 ᖺྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ䜘䜚㎰Ꮫ༤ኈᏛ఩䚹1988
ᖺ 9 ᭶䛛䜙䝔䜻䝃䝇ᕤ⛉኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫ㒊䚸⥆䛔䛶䝔䜻䝃䝇㎰ᕤ኱Ꮫ䝤䝷䝑䜽䝷䞁䝗◊✲ᡤ䛻䛶䝫䝇䝖䝗䜽䝖䝷䝹䝣䜵䝻䞊䛸䛧䛶䚸స≀᰿䛾Ỉ྾཰䝯䜹䝙䝈䝮䚸ྍረᛶ䛾◊✲䛻ᚑ஦䚹1990 ᖺ䛛䜙ྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫ㒊䛷స≀Ꮫ䛾ຓᡭ䚸1992 ᖺ䛛䜙ຓᩍᤵ䚸1999 ᖺ䛛䜙ᚠ⎔㈨※Ꮫᩍᤵ䚸2007 ᖺ䛛䜙ྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫᅜ㝿ᩍ⫱༠ຊ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊㛗䛻ᑵ௵䛧䚸⌧ᅾ䛻⮳䜛䚹䛣䛾㛫୍㈏䛧䛶䚸䝇䝖䝺䝇⏕⌮Ꮫ䚸䛺䜙䜃䛻స≀᰿䛾Ⓨ⫱䜔ᶵ⬟䜢⏕⌮⏕ែᏛⓗ䚸䛥䜙䛻䛿㑇ఏᏛⓗഃ㠃䛛䜙᫂䜙䛛䛻䛩䜛◊✲䛻ᚑ஦䛧䛶䛝䛯䚹䜎䛯䚸䝺䜲䝔ᕞ❧኱Ꮫ䠄䝣䜱䝸䝢䞁䠅䚸ᅜ㝿䜲䝛◊✲ᡤ䛺䛹䛸ඹྠ◊✲䜢ᒎ㛤䛧䛶䛝䛯䚹ᑓ㛛ศ㔝䛿స≀⏕⌮⏕ែᏛ䚹

Academic career
Professor Yamauchi received Ph.D. in 1988 from Graduate School of Agricultural Sciences, Nagoya
University.

Professional career
Professor Akira Yamauchi joined Texas Tech University as a post-doctoral research scientist, andBlackland Research Center of Texas A & M University, where he studied water uptake mechanism ofplant root.
Professor Yamauchi started to work for School of Agricultural Sciences, Nagoya University as an
assistant professor in 1990 and an associate professor in 1994 for crop science. His research work has
been mainly on crop stress physiology and root system development and functions from physiological,
ecological and genetic aspects in collaboration with other institutes such as Leyte State University(Philippines) and International Rice Research Institute. Since 1999, he has been working as Professor,
the Division of Biosphere Resources Cycling, Nagoya University, and Director of International
Cooperation Center for Agricultural Education, Nagoya University since 2007.

- 87 ８７

Achievements of Upland Rice Breeding in Japan in the Past 77 Years䜟䛜ᅜ䛾䛣䜜䜎䛷 㻣㻣 ᖺ䛻䜟䛯䜛㝣✄⫱✀◊✲䛾ᡂᯝ㻌
Achievements of Upland Rice Breeding in Japan in the Past 77 Years▼஭㻌 ༟ᮁ㻌 㼀㼍㼗㼡㼞㼛㻌㻵㼟㼔㼕㼕㻌⊂❧⾜ᨻἲே㻌 ㎰ᴗ䞉㣗ရ⏘ᴗᢏ⾡⥲ྜ◊✲ᶵᵓ㻌 స≀◊✲ᡤ㻌
National Institute of Crop Science
National Agriculture and Food Research Organization (NARO), Japanせ㻌 㻌 ⣙
䜟䛜ᅜ䛻䛚䛡䜛㝣✄⫱✀◊✲䛿䠈㣗⣊⮬⤥⋡䛾ྥୖ䜢┠ⓗ䛸䛧䛶 1929 ᖺ䛻㎰ᯘ┬䛜඲ᅜ䛾
5 䞃ᡤ䠄⛅ ⏣ 䠈Ⲉ ᇛ 䠈୕ 㔜 䠈㫽 ྲྀ 䠈㮵 ඣ ᓥ 䠅䛻㝣 ✄ ⫱ ✀ ᣦ ᐃ ヨ 㦂 ᆅ 䜢タ ⨨ 䛧䛯䛣䛸䛻ጞ 䜎䜛䚹ᡓ ᚋ 䛾⤌ ⧊ ෌ ⦅ ௨ 㝆 䛿䠈Ⲉ ᇛ ┴ ㎰ ᴗ ⥲ ྜ 䝉䞁䝍䞊䛜၏ ୍ 䛾ᣦ ᐃ ヨ 㦂 ᆅ 䛸䛧䛶ရ ✀ ⫱ ᡂ 䜢ᢸ 䛳䛶䛝䛯䛜䠈స௜㠃✚䛾ῶᑡ➼䛾⌮⏤䛛䜙 2005 ᖺᗘ䛷⤊஢䛧䛯䚹䛣䛾 77 ᖺ䛾㛫䛻 61 ရ✀䛜⫱ᡂ䛥䜜䛶䛔䜛䚹㻌 䛣䛾㛫䛾◊✲ෆᐜ䛚䜘䜃ᡂᯝ䛿᫬௦⫼ᬒ䛤䛸䛻኱䛝䛟ศ䛡䜛䛸௨ୗ䛾䛸䛚䜚䛷䛒䜛䚹
1929-1950㣗 ⣊ 䛾ቑ ⏘ 䛜ᙉ 䛟ồ 䜑䜙䜜䛯᫬ ᮇ 䛷䛒䜛䚹䛸䛟䛻㛤 ᣅ ᆅ 䛷䛿䠈㝣 ✄ 䛿⤒ Ⴀ 䛜Ᏻ ᐃ 䛩䜛䜎䛷䛾Ḟ 䛛䛫䛺䛔㣗⣊䛸䛧䛶㔜ど䛥䜜䛯䚹ရ✀⫱ᡂ䛿䠈⪏ᖸᛶ䛾ྥୖ䛸ከ཰ᛶ䜢┠ᶆ䛸䛧䛶᥎㐍䛥䜜䠈䛣䛾⤖ᯝ䠈▷ᙉ⛩䛷᱂ᇵ䛧䜔䛩䛟䠈ᙜ᫬䛸䛧䛶䛿Ⰻ㣗࿡䛾䛂㎰ᯘ 12 ྕ䛃䜔ከ཰ရ✀䛂㎰ᯘ⣍ 26 ྕ䛃➼䛜⫱ᡂ䛥䜜䛯䚹䜎䛯䠈᧛ ✀ ᮇ 䜔᱂ ᳜ ᐦ ᗘ 䠈ᩜ 䜟䜙ຠ ᯝ ➼ 䛾㝣 ✄ ᱂ ᇵ 䛻㛵 䛩䜛ᇶ ᮏ ⓗ 䛺◊ ✲ 䜔䜹䝸Ḟ ஈ ᅵ ተ䜔䝸䞁㓟Ḟஈᅵተ➼䛾㛤ᣅᆅ䛷᱂ᇵ䛩䜛䛯䜑䛾ရ✀ẚ㍑ヨ㦂䛜⾜䜟䜜䛯䚹
1951-1970ᘬ䛝⥆䛝㣗⣊䛾ቑ⏘䛜ồ䜑䜙䜜䜛୰䛷䠈⏿ᆅ䛛䜣䛜䛔タഛ䛜ᩚഛ䛥䜜ጞ䜑䛯䚹Ỉ✄ရ✀䛷䛿䛔䜒䛱⑓ 䛾ከ Ⓨ ➼ 䛾䛯䜑䠈⏿ 䛛䜣᱂ ᇵ 䜈䛾㌿ ⏝ 䛜ᅔ 㞴 䛺䛣䛸䛛䜙䠈⏿ ᆅ 䛛䜣䛜䛔䜢๓ ᥦ 䛸䛧䛯ᑓ ⏝ ရ ✀䛾⫱ ᡂ䛜┠ ᶆ䛸䛥䜜䠈୺ 䛻Ỉ ✄䛸㝣 ✄䛸䛾஺ 㓄 䛻䜘䜚ရ ✀ ⫱ ᡂ 䛜㐍 䜑䜙䜜䛯䚹䛣䛾⤖ ᯝ䠈ᙉ ⛩ 䞉ከ ཰ရ✀䛂䜸䜹䝭䝜䝸䛃䠄㎰ᯘ 24 ྕ㽢Ỉ✄㎰ᯘ 29 ྕ䠅䠈Ⰻ㉁䞉ከ཰ရ✀䛂䝭䝈䝝䝍䝰䝏䛃䠄㉺㊰᪩⏕㽢䝝䝍䝁䜺䝛䝰䝏䠅➼䛜⫱ᡂ䛥䜜䛯䚹䜎䛯䠈䛛䜣Ỉ᱂ᇵἲ䜔㝣✄䛾㯏㛫᱂ᇵἲ䛻㛵䛩䜛◊✲䛜ከ䛟䛺䛥䜜䛯䚹
1971-1988⡿䛾⏕⏘ㄪᩚ䛜㛤ጞ䛥䜜䜛୰䛷䠈㝣✄䛿㔝⳯䛾㐃స㞀ᐖ䜢⦆࿴䛩䜛ຠᯝ䛜䛒䜛䛣䛸䛛䜙䠈䜽䝸䞊䝙䞁䜾䜽䝻䝑䝥䛸䛧䛶㔝 ⳯ స 䛾㍯ స య ⣔ 䛻ྲྀ 䜚ධ 䜜䜙䜜ጞ 䜑䛯䚹䛣䛾䛯䜑䠈㔝 ⳯ స 䛸䛾⤌ ྜ 䛫䛜ᐜ ᫆ 䛷ᖸ䜀䛴ᅇ㑊ຠᯝ䜒ᮇᚅ䛥䜜䜛᪩⏕ရ✀䛾⫱ᡂ䛜୺┠ᶆ䛸䛥䜜䠈᪩⏕⇍ᮇ䛂䝖䝶䝝䝍䝰䝏䛃䜔䛂䜻䝶䝝䝍䝰䝏䛃䛜⫱ ᡂ 䛥䜜䛯䚹䜎䛯䠈㝣 ✄ 䛻䜘䜚㐃 స 㞀 ᐖ 䛜⦆ ࿴ 䛥䜜䜛௙ ⤌ 䜏䛻㛵 䛩䜛◊ ✲ 䜔እ ᅜ 㝣 ✄ 䛾⪏ᖸ ᛶ 䠄῝ ᰿ ᛶ䠅䛾ホ ౯ 䛸஺ 㓄 ẕ ᮏ 䛸䛧䛶䛾฼ ⏝䠈䝝䜴䝇䜢฼ ⏝ 䛧䛯⊂ ⮬ 䛾⪏ ᖸ ᛶ ᳨ ᐃ ᪉ ἲ 䛾㛤 Ⓨ 䛜㐍䜑䜙䜜䛯䚹

- 89 ８９International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

1989-2005㔝 ⳯ స 䜢୰ ᚰ 䛸䛩䜛⏿ స ⤒ Ⴀ 䛜୍ ẁ 䛸㞟 ⣙ ໬ 䛩䜛୰ 䛷䠈㔝 ⳯ స 䛸䛾⤌ ྜ 䛫䛜䜘䜚ᐜ ᫆ 䛺ᴟ ᪩ ⏕⇍ᮇ䛷䠈Ᏻᐃ⏕⏘䛜ྍ⬟䛸䛺䜛㧗ᗘ⪏ᖸᛶရ✀䛾⫱ᡂ䜢┠ᶆ䛸䛧䛶ရ✀⫱ᡂ䛜᥎㐍䛥䜜䛯䚹䛣䛾⤖ᯝ 䠈䜎䛪䠈እ ᅜ 㝣 ✄ 䛂JC81䛃䛻⏤ ᮶ 䛩䜛῝ ᰿ ᛶ 䜢ᑟ ධ 䛧䛯୰ ⏕ 䞉㧗 ᗘ ⪏ ᖸ ᛶ ရ ✀ 䛂䜖䜑䛾䛿䛯䜒䛱䛃䛜⫱ᡂ䛥䜜䠈ḟ䛻䛂䜖䜑䛾䛿䛯䜒䛱䛃䛾⪏ᖸᛶ䛸䛂㛵ᮾ⣍ 166 ྕ䛃䛾᪩⏕䞉⪏෭ᛶ䜢㞟✚䛩䜛䛣䛸䛻ᡂຌ 䛧䛯᪩ ⏕ 䞉Ᏻ ᐃ ከ ཰ ရ ✀ 䛂䜂䛯䛱䛿䛯䜒䛱䛃䛜⫱ ᡂ 䛥䜜䛯䚹䜎䛯䠈㝣 ✄ 㟂 せ 䛾ᣑ ኱ 䜢ᅗ 䜛䛯䜑䛾ຍᕤ≉ᛶ䛻㛵䛩䜛◊✲䜔䜲䝛䝀䝜䝮◊✲䛾㐍ᒎ䛻䛒䜟䛫䛶㝣✄䜢㑇ఏ㈨※䛸䛧䛶฼⏝䛧䠈㝣✄䛾᭷䛩䜛᪂つ䛔䜒䛱⑓ᅡሙ᢬ᢠᛶ㑇ఏᏊ䜢Ỉ✄䜈ᑟධ䛩䜛◊✲䛜㐍䜑䜙䜜䛯䚹
ᮏⓎ⾲䛷䛿䚸୺䛸䛧䛶₇⪅䜙䛜䛣䜜䜎䛷䛻⾜䛳䛶䛝䛯◊✲ᡂᯝ䜢䛯䛹䜚䛺䛜䜙䚸ᅵተ⎔ቃ䛾୰䛷䚸䛸䛟䛻䚸ᅵተỈศ䜢୰ᚰ䛻䛭䛾స≀᰿䛾Ⓨ⫱䜔ᶵ⬟䛻ཬ䜌䛩ᙳ㡪䜢䚸ྍረᛶ䜢䜻䞊䝽䞊䝗䛻⪃䛘䛶䜏䛯䛔䚹- 90 ９０

Achievements of Upland Rice Breeding in Japan in the Past 77 Years

Achievements of Upland Rice Breeding in Japan in the Past 77 Years㼀㼍㼗㼡㼞㼛㻌㻵㼟㼔㼕㼕㻌
National Institute of Crop Science,
National Agriculture and Food Research Organization (NARO), Japan

Abstract
In 1929, the government breeding program began upland rice breeding research at five breedingstations (Akita, Ibaraki, Mie, Tottori and Kagoshima). Though only Ibaraki Agricultural Center
continued upland rice breeding after the post war reorganization, upland rice breeding ended in
March 2006 because of a sharp decrease in cultivation area. Sixty-one varieties were bred from 1929
to 2006. Many studies had been carried out on drought resistance and other similar conditions.
The achievements of upland rice breeding in each time period are as follows:
1929-1950
The increase of crop production was strongly requested. Upland rice played an important role
until farming managements stabilized particularly at reclaimed field. The breeding objectives in thisperiod were mainly high yielding and drought resistance. As a result “Norin 12” which is a highyielding variety with relative short culm and “Norinmochi 26” which is a high yielding glutinous
variety and others were released. There were also discussions on basic cultivation studies such as
sowing time, sowing quantity and straw mulch effect as well as a variety of screening tests forreclaimed fields suffering from potassium and/or phosphorus deficiency.
1951-1970
The field irrigation systems began to be equipped in upland field, while the increase of crop
production was still requested. As the paddy rice was not suitable for upland cultivation due to damage
from blast disease, the specific varieties were requested for the cultivation at upland fields withirrigation systems. Therefore breeding was mainly promoted by a cross between paddy rice and uplandrice. As a result high yielding varieties such as “Okaminori”, “Mizuhatamochi” and others werereleased. Additionally many studies on the cultivation methods using field irrigation and cropping
systems with wheat or barley cultivation were carried out.
1971-1988
When the overproduction of paddy rice became a serious issue, upland rice began to be used as arotation crop because it had an effect on the decrease in continuous cropping injury of vegetables.
Thus, the breeding of early maturing varieties which made the rotation with vegetable cultivation
efficient and were expected to have the effect on drought escape was promoted. As a result earlymaturing varieties such as “Toyohatamochi” and “Kiyohatamochi” were released and evaluations ofdeep rooting of foreign upland rice cultivars as well as their utilization as breeding materials wereconducted. The greenhouse method for evaluation of drought resistance was also originally exploited.
1989-2005
As vegetable cultivation became more intensive, the very early maturing varieties with highdrought resistance were requested for the stable management of crop rotation. As a result, first
medium maturing variety “Yumenohatamochi” with deep rooting which was derived from foreign
upland cultivar “JC81” was released. Then a very early maturing and stably high yielding variety“Hitachihatamochi” which had the drought resistance acquired from “Yumenohatamochi” and very
early maturation and cold tolerance acquired from “Kantomochi 166” was released. Additionally,studies on the processing suitability for the promotion of upland rice consumption were discussed.

- 91 ９１

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Based on the idea of using upland rice as a genetic resource, the introgression of blast resistance genes
from upland rice into several types of paddy rice by using DNA markers was also promoted.

In 1929, the governmental breeding program began
upland rice breeding research at five breedingstations (Akita, Ibaraki, Mie, Tottori andKagoshima). Though only the Ibaraki Agricultural
Center continued upland rice breeding after the
post-war reorganization, upland rice breeding ended
in March 2006 because of a sharp decrease incultivation area. Sixty-one varieties were bred from
1929 to 2006.
In this article, first, I outline the achievements ofupland rice breeding on the basis of historicalbackground, then, I focus on the drought resistant
breeding which had been carried out consistently
during this period mainly based on the results ofIbaraki Agr. Center.

1. Transition of acreage and yield of uplandrice
Fig. 1 shows the transition of cultivation areaand yield per hectare of upland rice in Japan after
1900. Upland rice was an important crop for staple
food until 1960’s. The cultivation of upland rice was
encouraged for a production increase of rice afterWorld War II. The largest cultivation area of upland
rice was 180,000 hectares in 1960. However its
cultivation was dramatically decreased under the
overproduction of paddy rice. At present, the yield isabout 2.4 t/ha that is about half of paddy rice inJapan.
㻯㼡㼘㼠㼕㼢㼍㼠㼕㼛㼚㼍㼞㼑㼍㻌㻌䠄㽢
㻝㻜㻜㻜㼔㼍㻕
㻞㻜㻜

2. The achievements of upland rice breedingin each time period
1) I period (1929-1950)
The increase of crop production was strongly
requested. Upland rice played an important role
especially at reclaimed fields until farming
managements stabilized. The breeding objectives inthis period were mainly high yielding and drought
resistance. As a result, “Norin No. 12” (1936) which
is a high yielding variety with relative short culmand “Norinmochi No.26” (1947) which is a highyielding glutinous variety and others were released.
There were also discussions on basic cultivation
studies such as sowing time, sowing quantity andstraw mulch effect as well as a variety of screening
tests for reclaimed fields suffering from potassium
and/or phosphorus deficiency.
2) II period (1951-1970)
The field irrigation systems began to beequipped in upland field, while the increase of crop
production was still requested. As the paddy rice
was not suitable for upland cultivation due todamage from blast disease, the specific varieties
were requested for the cultivation at upland fields
with irrigation systems. Therefore, breeding was
mainly promoted by a cross between paddy rice andupland rice. as a result high-yielding variety㼅㼕㼑㼘㼐㻔㼠㻛㼔㼍㻕

Start (1929)
䊠

䊡

䊢

䊣

㻟㻚㻜

㻝㻤㻜
㻞㻚㻡

㻝㻢㻜
㻝㻠㻜

㻞㻚㻜

㻝㻞㻜
㻝㻜㻜

㻝㻚㻡

㻤㻜
㻝㻚㻜

㻢㻜
㻠㻜
㻞㻜
㻜
㻝㻥㻜㻜

Fig. 1㻯㼡㼘㼠㼕㼢㼍㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼍㼞㼑㼍㻔㽢㻝㻜㻜㻜㼔㼍㻕
㼅㼕㼑㼘㼐㻔㼠㻛㼔㼍㻕

㻝㻥㻞㻜

㻝㻥㻠㻜

㻜㻚㻡

㻝㻥㻢㻜

㻝㻥㻤㻜

㻜㻚㻜
㻞㻜㻜㻜 㼅㼑㼍㼞Transition of cultivation area and yield per hectare of upland rice in Japan- 92 ９２

Achievements of Upland Rice Breeding in Japan in the Past 77 Years" Okaminori" (1966), and high-yielding with goodquality " Mizuhatamochi" (1969), etc. were released.
“Okaminori” was bred from the cross between“Norin No.24” and paddy rice “Norin No.29”, and“Mizuhatamochi” was bred from the cross between
paddy rice “Kosijiwase” and “Hatakoganemochi”.
Additionally many studies on the cultivation
methods using field irrigation and cropping systems
with wheat or barley cultivation were carried out.
3) III period (1971-1988)
When the overproduction of paddy rice became aserious issue, upland rice began to be used as arotation crop because it had an effect on the decreasein continuous cropping injury of vegetables (Fig. 2).
Thus, the breeding of early maturing varieties which
made the rotation with vegetable cultivation
efficient and were expected to have the effect on
drought escape was promoted. As a result earlymaturing varieties such as “Toyohatamochi” (1985)
and “Kiyohatamochi” (1988) were released(explained later). Evaluations of deep rooting of
foreign upland rice cultivars and their utilization as
breeding materials were conducted. The greenhousemethod for evaluation of drought resistance was also
originally exploited (explained later).

Fig. 2 Effectiveness of upland rice to control injuries of vegetables under continuous
cropping (Matsuda 1974)

4) IV period (1989-2006)
As vegetable cultivation became more intensive,the very early maturing varieties with high drought
resistance were requested for the stable managementof crop rotation. As a result, medium maturing
variety “Yumenohatamochi” (1996) with deep
rooting which was derived from foreign uplandcultivar “JC81” was released (explained later). Thena very early maturing and stably high yielding
variety “Hitachihatamochi” (2005) which had thedrought
resistanceacquired
from“Yumenohatamochi” and very early maturation andcold tolerance acquired from “Kantomochi No.166”
was released (explained later).
Additionally,studies on the processing suitability for thepromotion of upland rice consumption werediscussed. Based on the idea of using upland rice as
genetic resources, the introgression of blast
resistance genes from upland rice into several typesof paddy rice by using DNA markers was also
promoted.

- 93 ９３

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Breeding strategy to improve drought
resistance in Japan
Two breeding strategies can be considered as the
drought-resistance mechanisms of upland rice," drought escape" and " physiological resistance" inJapan. We had been working to improve drought
resistance by the following three steps; 1) breed
early maturing varieties to avoid drought damage, 2)
breed deep rooting varieties to develop
physiological resistance, and 3) combine earlymaturation and deep rooting.
1)

Early maturation
In Japan, rainy season is from early June to lateJuly. After this period, season enters summer anddrought damage becomes serious. The reproductive
stage is the most susceptible for drought. Thus it ispossible to avoid drought damage if this stage can be

Photo 1

shifted away from the period when the possibility ofdrought is high.
We bred an early maturing variety,“Toyohatamochi” in 1985. Its heading date is about
two weeks earlier than that of“Tsukubahatamochi”, a medium maturing variety.
Photo 1 shows the upland rice field in August
1994 when there was a serious drought.
“Tsukubahatamochi” (Photo 1, right), whichheading date is in middle August, suffered serious
damage. However, “Toyohatamochi”(Photo 1, left),which had already passed its heading stage in late
July showed the growth condition that would bring acertain level of yield and this variety can be
described as succeeding in avoiding the drought. As“Toyohatamochi” shows drought resistance, its
cultivation area represents about 70% of the total
acreage of upland rice now.

Photo 2Upland rice after rainy season August.
Left half of photo is very early maturing variety“Toyohatamochi”, right is medium maturing“Tsukubahatamochi”.

2) Deep rooting
The root distribution at lower soil is related todrought tolerance because deep rooting varieties canabsorb much water from deep soil layer even in ayear of drought and can thus minimize droughtdamage.
We used the trench method to evaluate root depthof local varieties including foreign varieties fromSouth and Southeast Asia, China, Taiwan, Africa,
USA, Europe, etc (Photo 2). In this method, apower shovel was used to dig a 60cm groove along
the plant rows after harvesting, then distribution and

Observation of root by the trench method

quantity of roots at each soil depth were investigateddirectly.
As a result, we found some African, Indian andChinese varieties having deeper roots than Japanese
upland rice varieties.
In particular, Jaypole
collection No.81 (abbreviated as JC81), IR3646,
IRAT10, IRAT109, IRAT110, and Nam Sugai 19
were among those with highly developed rootsystems (Nemoto et al. 1998) and these werecrossed with Japanese upland rice varieties to obtainsuperior deep rooting varieties.

- 94 ９４

Achievements of Upland Rice Breeding in Japan in the Past 77 Years

Backcrossing of “Norinmochi No.4”, a Japanese
upland rice variety with “JC81”, a deep-rooting
Indian variety was promoted. After continuous strain
selection of the progenies of the cross by the trenchmethod,wesucceededinbreeding" Yumenohatamochi" , a medium maturing variety
with deep rooting in 1996 (Photo 3). The trench

Photo 3

method is the reliable method as evaluation ofdrought resistance, but it needs much labor.
Therefore, we developed a simple evaluation
method of using test beds installed in a greenhouse(Photo 4). The process of evaluation of drought
resistance is as follows (Suga et al.)Comparison of root distribution of “Toyohatamochi” (left) and Yumenohatamochi (right)䛆 㻰 㼞 㼛 㼡 㼓 㼠 㻼 㼘㼛 㼠 䛇䛆 㻯 㼔 㼑 㼏 㼗 㻼 㼘㼛 㼠 䛇㻿 㼛 㼕㼘 㼘㼍 㼥 㼑 㼞㻔㻞㻡㼏㼙 㻕㻳 㼞 㼍 㼢 㼑 㼘 㼘㼍 㼥 㼑 㼞㻔㻡㼏㼙 㻕

B ed So il

Photo 4

Screening house of deep rooting upland rice (left) and structure of bed (right)- 95 ９５International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

The upland rice sown in the test beds are grownby sprinkling water over the soil surface and theirrigation is stopped at the reproductive stage when
the plant is sensitive to water shortage. The bed ofdrought plot has a gravel layer 30 cm below thesurface. Because the gravel layer serves as a water
shutting-off layer, it prevents the moisture in the bed
soil layer from rising up to the upper plowed soil
layer. Thus after sprinkling over the soil surface isstopped, the moisture of the plowed soil layer
decreases greatly. Deep rooting upland rice cancontinue growing because their root extend throughthe gravel layer and can absorb moisture from the
bed soil, but shallow rooting one suffers serious
drought damage since its roots are distributed only
up to the plowed soil layer. The degree of
reduction in yield in the plot where drought
treatment is made is affected greatly by the length ofroots and so the method is very effective in
evaluating the deep rooting character of bred strains.
3) Combination of early maturing and deep rooting
characterWe succeeded in breeding “Hitachihatamochi”
by 䠿ombining the very early maturing character andthe deep rooting character in 2005. This new variety
was selected from the cross between early maturing
variety " Kantomochi No.166" and the hybrid of" Kantomochi No.166" and " Yumenohatamochi" .
" Hitachihatamochi" is an early maturing variety
with slightly short culm length. Its yielding ability
is higher than that of standard variety" Kiyohatamochi" by 20% almost every year. It
also shows high cold tolerance as well as drought

Photo 5

resistance.
Photo 5 shows that drought resistance of“Hitachihatamochi” is stronger than that of earlymaturing varieties such as “Toyohatamochi” and“Kiyohatamochi” (Photo 5). The leaves of“Hitachihatamochi” did not wither, whereas those of“Toyohatamochi” and “Kiyohatamochi” witheredup.
“Hitachihatamochi” was adopted as arecommended variety in Ibaraki Pref., which holds
about 70 % of total Japanese upland rice area, in2005. The release of this variety is expected tostabilize upland rice cultivation in Ibaraki Pref. andalso in Japan.

4. Future directions
Upland rice has not been used so much as
breeding materials of paddy rice, because it wasdifficult to remove bad characters linked withupland rice. But upland rice varieties are expected to
become handy genetic resources to improve paddy
rice because selection technologies using DNA
markers have being developing rapidly nowadays.
When seeing worldwide, upland rice is one of themost important crops in the developing countries
such as Western Africa and Latin America.
Moreover, the water resources has being
deteriorated globally, various characters of upland
rice by which water-saving cultivation becomes
possible, will get more attention in the near future.

Drought resistance of “Hitachihatamochi”, “Toyohatamochi”, “Kiyohatamochi” and“Yumenohatamochi” (from left to right)- 96 ９６

Achievements of Upland Rice Breeding in Japan in the Past 77 Years

References
1) 60th anniversary journal of Ibaraki Agriculturalexperimental station
2) 70th anniversary journal of Ibaraki Agriculturalexperimental station
3) 80th anniversary journal of Ibaraki Agriculturalexperimental station4) 90th anniversary journal of Ibaraki Agriculturalexperimental station5) 100th anniversary journal of Ibaraki Agriculturalresearch institute6) 50th anniversary journal of governmental
breeding program
7) 70th anniversary journal of governmental
breeding program
8) Matsuda A (1974) Nogyo Ibaraki 20 –22.
9) Nemoto et al. (1998)- 97 ９７

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Achievements of upland rice breeding inJapan in the past 77 years (1929-2006)

Takuro Ishii
National Institute of Crop Science,
National Agriculture and Food Research Organization(NARO)

䠍䠊Outline of achievements in each time period
䠎䠊Breeding strategy to improve drought resistance- 98 ９８

Achievements of Upland Rice Breeding in Japan in the Past 77 Years

Transition of upland rice breeding researchorganization
Akita

1929

IbarakiMie

TottoriKagoshima

1947
Akita

1951
Miyazaki (1956䡚
1961䠅

IbarakiTottori
Mie
Kagoshima

Miyazaki

2006

Transition of cultivation area and yield ability(1900䡚2005)
㻯㼡㼘㼠㼕㼢㼍㼠㼕㼛㼚㼍㼞㼑㼍㻌㻌䠄㽢
㻝㻜㻜㻜㼔㼍㻕
㻞㻜㻜㼅㼕㼑㼘㼐㻔㼠㻛㼔㼍㻕

Start (1929)
䊠

䊡

䊢

䊣

㻟㻚㻜

㻝㻤㻜
㻞㻚㻡

㻝㻢㻜
㻝㻠㻜

㻞㻚㻜

㻝㻞㻜
㻝㻜㻜

㻝㻚㻡

㻤㻜
㻝㻚㻜

㻢㻜
㻠㻜
㻞㻜
㻜
㻝㻥㻜㻜

㻯㼡㼘㼠㼕㼢㼍㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼍㼞㼑㼍㻔㽢㻝㻜㻜㻜㼔㼍㻕
㼅㼕㼑㼘㼐㻔㼠㻛㼔㼍㻕

㻝㻥㻞㻜

㻜㻚㻡

㻝㻥㻠㻜

㻝㻥㻢㻜

- 99 ９
９

㻝㻥㻤㻜

㻜㻚㻜
㻞㻜㻜㻜 㼅㼑㼍㼞International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8Distribution of upland rice cultivation
10,000ha<
5,000ha<

1980

1960

3,000ha<2000

1,000ha<
500ha<
100ha<

Main achievements
䕿 Sixty-one varieties were released; Toyohatamochi,
Yumenohatamochi, Hitachihatamochi, etc.
䕿 Prize of Japanese society of breeding 䠄Ibaraki Agr.
Center, 2004)- 100 １００Achievements of Upland Rice Breeding in Japan in the Past 77 Years

Period 䊠 䠄1929䡚
1950䠅

㻯㼡㼘㼠㼕㼢㼍㼠㼕㼛㼚㼍㼞㼑㼍㻌㻌䠄㽢
㻝㻜㻜㻜㼔㼍㻕
㻞㻜㻜㼅㼕㼑㼘㼐㻔㼠㻛㼔㼍㻕
㻟㻚㻜

㻝㻤㻜
㻞㻚㻡

㻝㻢㻜
㻝㻠㻜

㻞㻚㻜

㻝㻞㻜

䕿 Background
request for increase of crop production䠈
promotion of reclamation

㻝㻜㻜

㻝㻚㻡

㻤㻜
㻝㻚㻜

㻢㻜
㻠㻜
㻞㻜
㻜
㻝㻥㻜㻜

㻯㼡㼘㼠㼕㼢㼍㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼍㼞㼑㼍㻔㽢㻝㻜㻜㻜㼔㼍㻕
㼅㼕㼑㼘㼐㻔㼠㻛㼔㼍㻕

㻝㻥㻞㻜

㻝㻥㻠㻜

㻜㻚㻡

㻝㻥㻢㻜

㻝㻥㻤㻜

㻜㻚㻜
㻞㻜㻜㻜 㼅㼑㼍㼞䕿 Breeding objectives
high yielding, drought resistance䕿 Varieties released (27 varieties)
Norin 12 (1940): high yielding, good eating quality
Norinmochi 26䠄1947) : high yielding䠈drought resistance

Period 䊠 䠄1929䡚1950䠅
䕿 Related studies¾ Cultivation methods: desirable pattern of sowing;time, quantity, density,row width, etc.
¾ Variety screening 䠖 for reclaimed fields suffering from K or
P deficiency¾ Drought resistance䠖 effects of planting density, transplanting,straw mulch, cut-off leaves, etc.

- 101 １０１International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Period 䊡䠄1951䡚1970䠅㻯㼡㼘㼠㼕㼢㼍㼠㼕㼛㼚㼍㼞㼑㼍㻌㻌䠄㽢
㻝㻜㻜㻜㼔㼍㻕
㻞㻜㻜

㼅㼕㼑
㻔㼠㻛㼔

㻝㻤㻜
㻝㻢㻜
㻝㻠㻜
㻝㻞㻜

䕿 Background㻝㻜㻜㻤㻜request for increase of crop production,
promotion of field irrigation system

㻢㻜
㻠㻜
㻞㻜
㻜
㻝㻥㻜㻜

㻯㼡㼘㼠㼕㼢㼍㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼍㼞㼑㼍㻔㽢㻝㻜㻜㻜㼔㼍㻕
㼅㼕㼑㼘㼐㻔㼠㻛㼔㼍㻕

㻝㻥㻞㻜

㻝㻥㻠㻜

㻝㻥㻢㻜

㻝㻥㻤㻜

㻞㻜㻜㻜 㼅㼑㼍

䕿 Breeding objectives
specific varieties for cultivation under irrigation system,high yielding, good quality
䕿 Varieties released (23 varieties)
Okaminori 䠄1966): high yielding䠈䠄Norin24㽢 Norin 29(paddyrice))

Mizuhatamochi䠄1969): high yielding, good quality,
䠄Koshijiwase (paddy rice) 㽢Hatakoganemochi䠅

Period 䊡䠄1951䡚1970䠅䕿 Related studies¾Cultivation methods 䠖Sowing or transplanting time, influence of shading, etc.
under cropping system with wheat or barley
Yield test, grain quality, relationship between sowing timeand heading date, etc. under irrigation system
Mulch cultivation¾Drought resistance䠖Difference in T / R’ ratio (weight of top / weight of roots)
among varieties
 Relationship between T/R’ ratio and planting density, top
dressing, types at seedling stage,etc.

- 102 １０
２Achievements of Upland Rice Breeding in Japan in the Past 77 Years

rice- based cropping
systemupland rice-barley

Irrigation system

Mulch cultivation- 103 １０
３International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Period 䊢 䠄1971䡚1988䠅㻯㼡㼘㼠㼕㼢㼍㼠㼕㼛㼚㼍㼞㼑㼍㻌㻌䠄㽢
㻝㻜㻜㻜㼔㼍㻕
㻞㻜㻜㼅㼕㼑㼘㼐㻔㼠㻛㼔㼍㻕
㻟㻚㻜

㻝㻤㻜
㻞㻚㻡

㻝㻢㻜

䕿 Background

㻝㻠㻜

㻞㻚㻜

㻝㻞㻜

overproduction of paddy rice,

㻝㻜㻜

㻝㻚㻡

㻤㻜
㻝㻚㻜

㻢㻜

increase of high value crop
production (vegetables) in upland
field

㻠㻜
㻞㻜
㻜
㻝㻥㻜㻜

㻯㼡㼘㼠㼕㼢㼍㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼍㼞㼑㼍㻔㽢㻝㻜㻜㻜㼔㼍㻕
㼅㼕㼑㼘㼐㻔㼠㻛㼔㼍㻕

㻝㻥㻞㻜

㻝㻥㻠㻜

㻜㻚㻡

㻝㻥㻢㻜

㻝㻥㻤㻜

㻜㻚㻜
㻞㻜㻜㻜 㼅㼑㼍㼞䕿 Breeding objectives
early maturing䠈high yielding, drought resistance䕿 Varieties released䠄8 varieties䠅
early maturing 䠖 Fukuhatamochi (1978) ,Toyohatamochi (1985) ,Kiyohatamochi䠄1988)

Period 䊢 䠄1971䡚1988䠅
䕿 Related studies¾Cropping system䠖 effectiveness to control continuous cropping
injury of vegetables,
mechanisms of decreasing continuous
cropping injury¾Drought resistance䠖 screening of foreign varieties with deep
rootinggreen house method for evaluation¾Disease resistance䠖 inoculation method for evaluation of“Bakanae disease”- 104 １
０
４Achievements of Upland Rice Breeding in Japan in the Past 77 Years

Cropping system withvegetables

Effectiveness of
upland rice tocontrol injury diseaseof vegetable undercontinuous cropping(Matsuda 1974)- 105 １０
５International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Yield of upland rice under continuous cropping

Rate f yield at each
cultivation year(%)

(Hasegawa et al. 1964)

Period 䊣䠄1989䡚2006䠅㻯㼡㼘㼠㼕㼢㼍㼠㼕㼛㼚㼍㼞㼑㼍㻌㻌䠄㽢
㻝㻜㻜㻜㼔㼍㻕
㻞㻜㻜㼅㼕㼑㼘㼐㻔㼠㻛㼔㼍㻕
㻟㻚㻜㻝㻤㻜

䕿 Background

㻞㻚㻡

㻝㻢㻜
㻝㻠㻜

㻞㻚㻜

㻝㻞㻜

acceleration of intensive uplandfield management

㻝㻜㻜

㻝㻚㻜

㻢㻜
㻠㻜
㻞㻜
㻜
㻝㻥㻜㻜

䕿 Breeding objectives

㻝㻚㻡

㻤㻜

㻯㼡㼘㼠㼕㼢㼍㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼍㼞㼑㼍㻔㽢㻝㻜㻜㻜㼔㼍㻕
㼅㼕㼑㼘㼐㻔㼠㻛㼔㼍㻕

㻝㻥㻞㻜

㻝㻥㻠㻜

㻜㻚㻡

㻝㻥㻢㻜

㻝㻥㻤㻜

㻜㻚㻜
㻞㻜㻜㻜 㼅㼑㼍㼞very early maturing䠈stably high yielding䠈
processing suitability
䕿 Varieties released 䠄3 varieties䠅
Yumenohatamochi(1996) 䠖medium maturity䠈deep rooting,good eating quality
Hitachihatamochi䠄2005) 䠖early maturity, stably high yielding- 106 １
０
６Achievements of Upland Rice Breeding in Japan in the Past 77 Years

Period 䊣䠄1989䡚2006䠅
䕿 Related studies¾ Processing suitability䠖 fast hardening lines¾ Drought resistance䠖 detection of QTLs
¾ Utilization as genetic resources 䠖Introgression of blast resistant genes to paddy rice,
Core collection from local upland rice varieties

Processing
suitability

low hardening

fast hardening

Toyohatamochi

Kantomochi 172- 107 １０
７International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

New QTLs of blast field resistance from upland rice “Kahei”
Chr. 4Lod ScoreqBFR4-1(Single QTL model)

30

20qBFR4-2

10* = RM5473

C6 0 0 G2 3 5 G26 4

C5 1 3 R8 2 9MRG4586 G2 7 1
MRG0359

0

R7 3 8

RM5503G1 0 2

R1 7 5 9 R5 1 4*MRG4709

R1 4 2 7

RM6629RM5771

MRG4506

G1 9 7
G1 77
MRG5748
R23 7 6
C81 0

10

20

30

MRG, RM䠖SSR䝬䞊䜹䞊

40

50

60

70

80

cM

Breeding strategy to improve drought resistance- 108 １０８Achievements of Upland Rice Breeding in Japan in the Past 77 Years

Occurrence of drought injury at eachgrowth stage in Japan

Germination
periodVegetative
periodReproductive
periodLow
temperature

Rainy
seasonMid summer

Drought
injuryBreeding strategy to improve drought
resistance of upland rice in Japan

1. Breeding for drought escape䊻 Early maturing
2. Breeding for deep rooting- 109 １０
９International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Drought escape

Early maturing variety “ Toyohatamochi”

The most sensitive period of crop to drought:
period from panicle formation to heading
The hottest period: August

Effect of cut off
water supply forgrain sterility Sterility(%)

Heading

1994.Aug.

Tsukubahatamochi:
medium maturing

Toyohatamochi:
early maturing- 110 １
１
０

(day)

Achievements of Upland Rice Breeding in Japan in the Past 77 Years

Breeding of deep rooting in Ibaraki
Agriculture Center
1. Enlargement of genetic resource;
Varietal screening of foreign varieties with deep
rooting by using 䇾Trench method䇿

2. Establishment of selection method
Utilization of evaluation system of progeny lines byusing 䇾Specific nursery bed 䇿 (green house method)

Varietal screeningof deep rooting by
the trench method

Observed characters
Root volume, Thickness
Depth of root tip- 111 １１
１International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8[ China]

Varietal screeningof rooting under
trench method[ America and Europe][ India][ IRRI]

Detected foreign varieties
with deep rooting[ Taiwan]

JC81䠈B5416䠄India䠅
IRAT10, 109䠄Liberia䠅
Nam Sugai䠄China䠅[ Africa]

IR3646(IRRI), etc.
(Ibaraki Agri. Center 1979 to 1983)
Root volume

Root thickness

Establishment of deep rooting variety“Yumenohatamochi” (1996)㻿㼑㼚㼟㼔㼛㼡
㻺㼛㼞㼕㼚 㻺㼛㻠㻱㼟㼛㼟㼔㼕㼙㼍
㼙㼛㼏㼔㼕㻺㼛㼞㼕㼚 㻺㼛㻠䠢䠍㼅㼡㼙㼑㼚㼛㼔㼍㼠㼍㼙㼛㼏㼔㼕
䠞䠟䠍䠢䠍

䠦䠟䠔䠍
㻺㼛㼞㼕㼚 㻺㼛㻠- 112 １
１
２Achievements of Upland Rice Breeding in Japan in the Past 77 Years

Deep rooting variety “Yumenohatamochi”

Yumenohtamochi

Toyohatamochi

Yield of 䇾Yumenohatamochi䇿 in drought year
Varieties

Average yieldfrom 1989 to 1995
Yield
Rate
(t/ha)(%)

Average yield in droughtyears 1992 and 1994
Yield
Rate
(t/ha)(%)

Yumenohatamochi3.42 111

1.64

148

Tsukubahatamochi

3.09 100

1.11

100

Norinmochi26

2.74

0.58

52

89

- 113 １
１
３International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Indirect method to estimate rooting (green house method)䛆 㻰㼞㼛 㼡 㼓㼠 㻼 㼘㼛 㼠䛇䛆 㻯 㼔 㼑 㼏 㼗 㻼 㼘㼛㼠䛇

Soil layer(25cm)
Gravel layer (5cm)

Bed Soil

Irrigation at drought plot
is stopped at the
reproductive stage.

- 114 １
１
４Achievements of Upland Rice Breeding in Japan in the Past 77 Years䛆 㻰㼞㼛㼡 㼓㼠 㻼㼘㼛㼠䛇䛆 㻯 㼔 㼑 㼏 㼗 㻼㼘㼛㼠䛇㻿 㼛㼕㼘 㼘㼍 㼥 㼑㼞㻔㻞㻡㼏㼙 㻕㻳 㼞㼍 㼢 㼑㼘 㼘㼍 㼥 㼑㼞㻔㻡㼏㼙 㻕

Bed Soil

Distribution of grain yield of rice varieties in specificnursery bed method

Yield atdroughtplot䕕 Upland rice
䕦 Intermediate type(grain(g)/7 plants)

䕔 Lowland rice

Yield rate (drought plot / check plot)- 115 １
１
５

(Ibaraki Agri. Center)

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Combination of drought escape and deep rooting

New variety͆Hitachihatamochi ͇(2005)

Early maturing, stably
high yielding variety“Hitachihatamochi” (left)( right: Kiyohatamochi)

Drought resistance of early maturing andhigh yielding variety “Hitachihatamochi”

Hitachihatamochi

Toyohatamochi- 116 １
１
６Kiyohatamochi

Achievements of Upland Rice Breeding in Japan in the Past 77 Years

Characteristics of 䇾Hitachihatamochi䇿Variety nameHeading Culm Pancle Panicle Whole Brown rice Yield
date
length length number weightweightratio(㹡㹫) (㹡㹫) 㸦/m2)(t/ha)(t/ha)(%)

Hitachihatamochi
Kiyohatamochi

7.29
8. 2

69
73

19.3
20.2

297
289

9.3
9.6

3.6
3.1

120
100

Toyohatamochi

7.28

71

19.7

265

8.2

2.7

85

(1999-2004)

Acknowledgement
Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries Research Council of Ministryof Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries (MAFF) for financial aid,
Ibaraki local government for assistance for promotion ofbreeding
Upland ricecultivation- 117 １１
７International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8ឋွࣖሉ
3WGUVKQP CPF #PUYGT 5GUUKQP䜟䛜ᅜ䛾䛣䜜䜎䛷䠓䠓ᖺ䛻䜟䛯䜛㝣✄⫱✀◊✲䛾ᡂᯝ
Achievements of Upland Rice Breeding in Japan in the Past 77 Years▼஭ ༟ᮁ㻌 㻌 Takuro Ishii⊂❧⾜ᨻἲே ㎰ᴗ䞉㣗ရ⏘ᴗᢏ⾡⥲ྜ◊✲ᶵᵓ㻌 స≀◊✲ᡤ
National Institute of Crop Science,
National Agriculture and Food Research Organization (NARO), Japanྖ఍䠖㻌 ᮡᮏ ඘㑥
Chair person: Mitsukuni Sugimotoྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫᅜ㝿ᩍ⫱༠ຊ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊㻌 ෸ᩍᤵ
Associate Professor, ICCAE, Nagoya Universityᮡᮏ䠄ྖ఍䠅䠖
Thank you very much for your presentation.

Mr. Ishii has briefly explained Japanese

government’s experience of Japanese government for seventy-seven years overupland rice varieties, and drought resistance, as well as deep-root varieties.
Are there any questions?
஧ཱྀ䠖ඛ䜋䛹ⱝ᭶䛥䜣䛛䜙䜒 NERICA 䛾ၥ㢟䛻㛵㐃䛧䛶㉁ၥ䛥䛫䛶䛔䛯䛰䛔䛯䛾䛷䛩䛜䚸䠐䝖䞁䜋䛹ྲྀ䜛䛯䜑䛻䛿䚸❅⣲䛺䛹䛾⫧ᩱ䜢ධ䜜䛺䛔䛸䛔䛡䛺䛔䛰䜝䛖䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䛷䛧䛯䚹ᐇ䛿⚾䛿䛂䜰䝣䝸䜹ே㐀䜚䝥䝻䝆䜵䜽䝖䛃䛻䜎䛰㛵ಀ䛧䛶䛔䜎䛩䛾䛷ཧ⪃䜎䛷䛻ఛ䛔䛯䛔䛾䛷䛩䛜䚸౛䛘䜀 nitrogen response 䛸䛔䛖ゝ䛔᪉䜢䛧䜎䛩䛜䚸paddy 䛾ሙྜ䛿㑏ඖᒙ䛸䛔䛖䛾䛜䛒䜚䚸᭷ᶵ≀䛜㠀ᖖ䛻⦆⾜ⓗ䛻䜖䜛䛟䝸䝸䞊䝇䛥䜜䜛䛸⪺䛔䛶䛔䜎䛩䚹䛧䛛䜒ከศ◲Ᏻ䛺䛹䛜ከ䛔䜒䛾䛷䛩䛛䜙䚸㝣✄䛾ሙྜ䛸䛛 NERICA 䛾ሙྜ䛰䛸䜴䝺䜰(ᒀ⣲)䛸䛛䛭䛖䛔䛖䜒䛾䜢౑䛖䛣䛸䛻䛺䜛䛾䛛䛸䛔䛖䛾䛜୍Ⅼ䛸䚸䛭䛾᪋⫧䛾᪉ἲ䛜䚸㑏ඖᒙ䛜䛒䜛䛯䜑䛻䝸䝸䞊䝇䛥䜜䜛䛾䛜๭䛻䜖䛳䛟䜚䛰䛸ᡃ䚻స≀ᒇ䛿⪺䛔䛶䛔䛯䛾䛷䚸䛭䛖䛔䛖Ⅼ䛛䜙䛩䜛䛸䚸NERICA 䛺䛹䛻ᑐ䛩䜛 upland 䛾ᐇ㦂䜢䛺䛥䛳䛶䛝䛯⤒㦂䛛䜙 NERICA 䛾䜘䛖䛺 upland 䛾ሙྜ䛾⫧ᩱ䛾䜔䜚᪉䚸䜒䛧䛟䛿 nitrogen response䚸䛛䛴䛶 IR-8 䛾ሙྜ䚸㠀ᖖ䛻ၥ㢟䛻䛺䛳䛯䜟䛡䛷䛩䛜䚸⿢᳜ᐦᗘ䜔 rainy season 䛸䛾㛵ಀ䜒䛒䜚䜎䛩䛧䚸⡆༢䛻䛔䛔䜎䛩䛸䚸❅⣲཯ᛂ䛾 lowland rice 䛸 upland rice 䛻䛚䛡䜛㐪䛔䛻䛴䛔䛶䜂䛸䛴䛚ヰ䛧䜢ఛ䛔䛯䛔䛸ᛮ䛔䜎䛩䚹▼஭䠖⚾䛹䜒䛷䛿䚸᪋⫧㔞䛿❅⣲䝺䝧䝹䛷䛰䛔䛯䛔 12 䜻䝻䛠䜙䛔୚䛘䛶䛔䜎䛧䛶䚸䛭䜜䛜䛤䛟୍⯡ⓗ䛺᱂ᇵ᪉ἲ䛰䛸ᛮ䛔䜎䛩䚹❅⣲䜢୚䛘䜜䜀୚䛘䜛䜋䛹ྲྀ䜜䜎䛩䛜䚸䛯䛰䚸඲㔜䛜㔜䛟䛺䜛䛸௒ᗘᖸ䜀䛴䛻ᙅ䛟䛺䜛䜟䛡䛷䛩䛧䚸⵨ᩓ㔞䜒ቑ䛘䜛䛣䛸䛻䛺䜚䜎䛩䛾䛷䚸䛒䜎䜚䜔䜚䛩䛞䜛䛾䛿Ⰻ䛟䛺䛔䛸ᛮ䛔䜎䛩䚹10 䜻䝻䛠䜙䛔䛜᭱㐺䛺㔞䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䛷ⴠ䛱╔䛔䛶䛔䜛䛾䛰䛸ᛮ䛔䜎䛩䚹䛯䛰䚸ရ✀䛻䜘䛳䛶䛛䛺䜚❅⣲཯ᛂ䛾ᕪ䛜䛒䜚䜎䛩䚹- 118 １
１
８Achievements of Upland Rice Breeding in Japan in the Past 77 Years᪥ᮏ䛾ᅾ᮶ရ✀䛸ẚ䜉䛶䜏䜎䛧䛶䜒䚸䛩䛠䛻ⱼᩘ䚸✑ᩘ䛜ቑ䛘䛶཯ᛂ䛩䜛䜒䛾䛸䛺䛛䛺䛛཯ᛂ䛧䛺䛔䜒䛾䜒䛒䜚䜎䛩䚹䛒䜎䜚✑ᩘ䛜ቑ䛘䛺䛔ሙྜ䛿䛹䜣䛹䜣䜔䜜䜀䛔䛔䛾䛷䛧䜗䛖䛜䚸䛩䛠䛻ቑ䛘䜛ရ✀䛰䛸䛺䛛䛺䛛䜔䜜䛺䛔䛸䛔䛖䛸䛣䜝䛷䚸ᙜ᫬䛾᪋⫧ヨ㦂䛺䛹䜒䛔䜝䛔䜝䜔䜙䜜䛶䛔䜛䜟䛡䛷䛩䛜䚸ရ✀䛤䛸䛻䛣䛾ရ✀䛻䛿䛣䛖䛔䛖䜅䛖䛻䜔䜛䚸䛸䛔䛖⤖ᯝ䛻䛺䛳䛶䛔䜎䛧䛶䚸NERICA 䛾ሙྜ䜒䛭䜜䛮䜜䛻ᛂ䛨䛶᭱㐺䛺᪋⫧㔞䜢ぢ䛴䛡䛶䛔䛛䛺䛟䛶䛿䛺䜙䛺䛔䛰䜝䛖䛸ᛮ䛳䛶䛚䜚䜎䛩䚹஧ཱྀ䠖᪋⫧䛻䛿ᬑ㏻䛿䜔䛿䜚䜴䝺䜰䜢౑䛖䛾䛷䛩䛛䠛▼஭䠖⚾䛹䜒䛷䛿◲Ᏻ䛷ᬑ㏻䛾㏣⫧䛷䛩䚹஧ཱྀ䠖⚾㐩䛾ሙྜ䛿◲Ᏻ䛾๭ྜ䛜ඃໃ䛺䛾䛷䛩䛡䜜䛹䜒䚸upland 䛾ሙྜ䛿㎰ᐙ䜒䜴䝺䜰䜢⏿స≀ⓗ䛺⪃䛘䛛䛯䛷౑䛖䛾䛷䛩䛛䠛 ᪥ᮏ䛾ሙྜ䛻䛴䛔䛶䛿䛹䛖䛷䛧䜗䛖䛛䚹▼஭䠖᪥ᮏ䛾ሙྜ䛿Ỉ✄䛻‽䛨䛯䜘䛖䛺ᙧ䛷୚䛘䛶䛔䜎䛩䚹஧ཱྀ䠖䛿䛔䚸䛹䛖䜒䛒䜚䛜䛸䛖䛤䛦䛔䜎䛧䛯䚹⚄௦䠖

JIRCAS 䛾⚄௦䛷䛩䛜䚸⪏஝ᛶ䛾ရ✀䛻䛴䛔䛶䛚䛯䛪䛽䛧䜎䛩䚹῝᰿ᛶ䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䛷䛂䜖䜑䛾䛿䛯䜒䛱䛃䛸䛛䚸䛂䜂䛯䛱䛿䛯䜒䛱䛃䛸䛔䛳䛯䠎䛴䛾஝⇱⪏ᛶ䛾䜒䛾䛻䛴䛔䛶㏙
䜉䛶䛚䜙䜜䛯䛾䛷䛩䛜䚸䛣䜜䛿䛔䜟䜖䜛஝⇱⪏ᛶ䜢ᵓᡂ䛧䛶䛔䜛ᙧ㉁䚸౛䛘䜀䚸⵨ᩓ㔞䚸ẼᏍ㛤ᗘ䛸䛔䛖䛾䛿῝᰿ᛶ䛸ఱ䛛䝸䞁䜽䛧䛶㛵䜟䛳䛶䛔䜛䛾䛷䛧䜗䛖䛛䚹▼஭䠖䛱䜗䛳䛸䛭䛣䜎䛷䛿ぢ䛶䛔䛺䛔䛾䛷䛩䛜䚸䛂䜖䜑䛾䛿䛯䜒䛱䛃䛾ሙྜ䛿ⴥ䛾ᗘ䛜䜔䜔ప䛔䛸䛔䛖䜘䛖䛺ヰ䛿⪺䛔䛯䛣䛸䛜䛒䜚䜎䛩䚸⵨ᩓ䛜⃭䛧䛔䛷䛩䛛䜙䚹䛂䜂䛯䛱䛿䛯䜒䛱䛃䛾ሙྜ䛿䛱䜗䛳䛸䛭䛣䜎䛷☜ㄆ䛧䛶䛚䜚䜎䛫䜣䚹䛯䛰䛚䛭䜙䛟⵨ᩓ䛿⃭䛧䛟ฟ䛶䛔䜛䜘䛖䛺Ẽ䛜䛧䜎䛩䚹⚄௦䠖⚾䛯䛱䜒஝⇱⪏ᛶ䛾䛣䛸䜢䜔䛳䛶䛔䜎䛩䛜㠀ᖖ䛻」㞧䛺ᙧ㉁䛷ఱ䜢䝯䝹䜽䝬䞊䝹䛻㑅ᢤ䛧䛶䛔䛔䛾䛛䚸䛱䜗䛳䛸䛔䜝䛔䜝㞴䛧䛔䛸䛣䜝䛜䛒䜚䜎䛩䚹౛䛘䜀῝᰿ᛶ䛾䜒䛾䛿஝⇱⪏ᛶ䛾ఱ䠂䛠䜙䛔䜢ㄝ᫂䛷䛝䜛䛸ぢ✚䜒䛳䛶䛔䜎䛩䛛䠛▼஭䠖䛭䜜䛿䚸ఱ䠂䛸⟅䛘䜛䛾䛿㞴䛧䛔䛷䛩䛽䚹䛯䛰䚸௒᪥ᮏ䛷⫱✀䛩䜛ሙྜ䛻䛔䜝䛔䜝ᗂⱑᮇ䛷᳨ᐃ䛧䛯䜚䛧䛶䛔䜝䛔䜝䜔䛳䛶䛝䛯䜟䛡䛷䛩䛜䚸⤖ᒁ䛿ᡂ⇍ᮇ䛾᰿䛾㔜䛥䜢㔞䜛䛾䛜୍␒ṇ䛧䛔䛰䜝䛖䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䛸䛷䜔䛳䛶䜎䛔䜚䜎䛧䛯䚹῝᰿ᛶ䛾᰿㔞䛸䛔䛖䛾䛜୍␒኱䛝䛺ᙧ㉁䛻䛺䜛䛸ᛮ䛔䜎䛩䚹䛭䜜௨እ䛾ᙧ㉁䛿䛱䜗䛳䛸䜟䛛䜚䜎䛫䜣䚹῝᰿ᛶ䛾䜒䛾䛜ⴥ㠃䛾ᗘ䛜ప䛔䛸䛔䛖ሗ࿌䜢⪺䛔䛯䛣䛸䜒䛒䜚䜎䛩䛜䚸ⴥ䛳䜁䛾- 119 １１９ᗘ䜢International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8䜛䛸䛔䛖䛾䜒䚸ⴥ䛾ᗘ䛿୍᪥䛾㛫䛷䜒䛛䛺䜚ኚ䜟䜛䛾䛷䚸ᐇ㝿䛿᰿䜢䜛䛾䛜୍␒᪩䛔䛸ᛮ䛔䜎䛩䚹ⱝ᭶䠖㏆␥኱Ꮫ䛾ⱝ᭶䛷䛩䚹䜰䝣䝸䜹䛸᪥ᮏ䛷䛿ᅵ䛾ᅛ䛥䛜䛛䛺䜚㐪䛔䜎䛩䛽䚹᪥ᮏ䛰䛸ᒣ୰ᘧ䛾◳ᗘィ䛷 20 䛷䛛䛺䜚㧗䛔䛷䛩䛡䜜䛹䚸䜐䛣䛖䛿 30 䛠䜙䛔㍍䛟ฟ䜎䛩䜘䛽䚹ᙉ䛥䚸◳䛥䚸῝䛥䚸䛭䛧䛶ඛ䜋䛹䛾᪋⫧䛷䜒┦㐪䛜ฟ䜎䛧䛯䛜䚸䛭䜜䜢✺◚䛷䛝䜛䜘䛖䛺
ᛶ㉁䚸䛭䛾῝᰿ᛶ䝥䝷䝇ఱ䛛ᙉ䛥䜏䛯䛔䛺䚸☜䛛ᆏୖ䛥䜣䛜ఱ䛛䛥䜜䛶䛔䛯䜘䛖䛷䛩䛜䚸䛭䛾䛒䛯䜚䛿ఱ䛛䜔䛳䛶䛚䜙䜜䛯䛣䛸䛒䜚䜎䛩䛷䛧䜗䛖䛛䠛▼஭䠖䛭䜜䛿⚾䛿䜔䛳䛶䛔䜎䛫䜣䛜䚸᫇䛿⾲ᅵ䛾῝䛥䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䛷䚸ఱ䝉䞁䝏䛠䜙䛔䜎䛷⪔䛩䛾䛜㝣✄䛻䛸䛳䛶୍␒䜘䛔䛛䛸䛔䛖ヨ㦂䜢䛧䛯䛸ㄞ䜣䛰䛣䛸䛜䛒䜚䜎䛩䚹䛭䛖䛧䜎䛩䛸䚸せ䛿῝䛟⪔䛫䜀⪔䛩䜋䛹᰿䛜ୗ䜎䛷ධ䜛䛾䛷Ⰻ䛔䛸䛔䛖䜘䛖䛺᫛࿴ 15䡚16 ᖺ䛾ヨ㦂⤖ᯝ䛷䛩䛜䚸䛭䛖䛔䛖䛾䛿䛒䜚䜎䛩䚹䛯䛰䚸᰿䛾ධ䜛ᙉ䛥䚸㈏㏻ຊ䛻䛴䛔䛶䛿᪥ᮏ䛸䛔䛖䛛䚸⚾䛯䛱䛾◊✲ᐊ䛷䛿ᐇ㦂䜢䜔䛳䛯䛣䛸䛜䛺䛔䛷䛩䚹䛯䛰䜂䛯䛩䜙᥀䜛䛾䜏䛷䛩䚹ᮡᮏ䠄ྖ఍䠅䠖
௚䛻㉁ၥ䛿䛒䜚䜎䛩䛛䠛㻌 䛺䛡䜜䜀⤊䜟䜙䛫䛶䛔䛯䛰䛝䜎䛩䚹䛒䜚䛜䛸䛖䛤䛦䛔䜎䛧䛯䚹- 120 １２０

Achievements of Upland Rice Breeding in Japan in the Past 77 Years

Profile▼஭ ༟ᮁ Takuro Ishii⊂❧⾜ᨻἲே㻌 ㎰ᴗ䞉㣗ရ⏘ᴗᢏ⾡⥲ྜ◊✲ᶵᵓ㻌 స≀◊✲ᡤ ୖᖍ◊✲ဨ
Senior Researcher
National Institute of Crop Science (NICS)
National Agriculture and Food Research Organization (NARO), Japan
Contact:

National Institute of Crop Science (NICS)
Kannondai, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, 305-8518, Japan
Tel/Fax: + 81-29-838-8950
E-mail: isiitkr@ affrc.go.jp

1989 ᖺி㒔኱Ꮫ኱Ꮫ㝔㎰Ꮫ◊✲⛉ಟኈㄢ⛬ಟ஢䚹ឡ▱┴㎰ᴗ⥲ྜヨ㦂ሙ䛷㔝⳯䛾᱂ᇵ⏕⌮◊✲䛻ᚑ஦䛧䛯ᚋ䚸1991 ᖺ䛛䜙୰ᅜ㎰ᴗヨ㦂ሙ䛷Ỉ✄䛾⫱✀◊✲䛻ᚑ஦䚹1999 ᖺ䛛䜙㎰Ỉ┬㎰⏘ᅬⱁᒁ䛚䜘䜃㎰ᯘỈ⏘ᢏ⾡఍㆟஦ົᒁ䛷䚸ᅵᆅ฼⏝ᆺ㎰ᴗ䛾⤒Ⴀᒎᮃ䛾❧᱌ᴗົ䜔Ỉ⏣స䜢୰ᚰ䛸䛧䛯◊✲䝥䝻䝆䜵䜽䝖䛾ㄪᰝ䞉௻⏬ᴗົ䛻ᚑ஦䚹2001 ᖺ䛛䜙㎰ᴗ⏕≀㈨※◊✲ᡤ䛷㑇ఏ㈨※䛾ከᵝᛶಖ඲䛾◊✲䛻ᚑ஦䛧䛯ᚋ䚸2003 ᖺ䛛䜙Ⲉᇛ┴⏕≀ᕤᏛ◊✲ᡤ䠄㎰Ỉ┬㝣✄⫱✀ᣦᐃヨ㦂ᆅ䠅䛷㝣✄⫱✀䛻ᚑ஦䚹2006 ᖺ 4 ᭶䛛䜙㎰◊ᶵᵓస≀◊✲ᡤ✄䝬䞊䜹䞊⫱✀◊✲䝏䞊䝮䛷ୖᖍ◊✲ဨ䛸䛧䛶෌䜃Ỉ✄⫱✀䛻ᚑ஦䛧䚸⌧ᅾ䛻⮳䜛䚹ᑓ㛛ศ㔝䛿䚸⫱✀Ꮫ䚸⤫ィ㑇ఏᏛ䚹

Academic career
Mr. Takuro Ishii graduated from Graduate School of Agriculture, Kyoto University, in 1989.

Professional career
After the graduation, Mr. Takuro Ishii worked for the Aichi Agricultural Experiment Station in
Japan for two years on vegetable physiology. From 1991 to 1999, Mr. Ishii served as a rice breeder
for the Chugoku National Agricultural Experiment Station. For the following two years, he worked
as a research coordinator for the Bureau of Crop Production and Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
Research Council of the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries of Japan (MAFF). In 2001,
he moved to the National Institute of Agrobiological Sciences (NIAS) to study genetic diversity
conservation. In 2003, he moved to the Ibaraki Plant Biotechnology Institute and served as an
upland rice breeder. In April 2006, Mr. Ishii joined the National Institute of Crop Science as a chief
researcher and is currently working on improvement of rice varieties by using the method ofmarker-assisted selection.

- 121 １
２
１Socioeconomic Factors Needed for NERICA Dissemination in Kenya

䜿䝙䝲䛻䛚䛡䜛䝛䝸䜹⡿ᬑཬ䛻ලഛ䛩䜉䛝♫఍⤒῭ⓗせ⣲㻌Socioeconomic Factors Needed for NERICA Dissemination in Kenya➉㇂㻌 ⿱அ㻌 㻴㼕㼞㼛㼥㼡㼗㼕㻌㼀㼍㼗㼑㼥㼍㻌ྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ኱Ꮫ㝔⏕࿨㎰Ꮫ◊✲⛉ᩍᤵ䠋㎰Ꮫᅜ㝿ᩍ⫱༠ຊ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊㛗䠆㻌
Professor, Graduate School of Bioagricultural Sciences
Director, International Cooperation Center for Agricultural Education (ICCAE),
Nagoya University, Japan 䠆㻶㼛㼟㼑㼜㼔㻌㻺㼑㼣㼠㼛㼚㻌㻻㻚㻌㻻㼗㼑㼏㼔㻌 㻌 䝆䝵䝉䝣䞉䝙䝳䞊䝖䞁䞉㻻䞉䜸䜿䝏㻌䜿䝙䜰ᅜ❧㎰ᴗ◊✲ᡤ䜻䝪䝇䝉䞁䝍䞊㻌 ♫఍⤒῭◊✲㒊㛗㻌
Head of Socio Economics Department,
Kenya Agricultural Research Institute (KARI), Kibos Center, Kenya

せ㻌 㻌 ⣙
ࢣࢽ࡛ࣖࡣேཱྀቑຍ࡜㒔ᕷ໬࡟ࡼࡾࢥ࣓ࡀࡇࡇᩘᖺࠊከࡃࡢୡᖏ࡛ᛴ㏿࡟୺㣗ࡢ୍㒊ࢆ༨ࡵࡿࡼ࠺࡟࡞ࡗ࡚ࡁ࡚࠸ࡿ㸦Kennedy and Readon, 1994㸧ࠋ2002 ᖺ࠿ࡽ 2003 ᖺࡢ㛫࡟ࢥ࣓ࡢᾘ㈝㔞ࡣ 35.2㸣ࡢቑຍࢆ♧ࡋࠊ2005 ᖺ࡟ࡣ⏕⏘ࡀ 8 ୓ 5 ༓ࢺࣥࠊᾘ㈝ࡀ 31 ୓ 1 ༓ࢺࣥ࡟㐩ࡋࠊ⏕⏘㔞࡜ᾘ㈝㔞ࡢᕪࡣ⣙ 1 ൨ 7 ༓୓ࢻࣝศࡢ㍺ධ࡛⿵ሸࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ࡜ࡳࡽࢀࡿ㸦CBIK, 2005㸧ࠋࢥ࣓ࡢ⏕⏘㔞ࡀప࠸ཎᅉ࡜ࡋ࡚ࠊ୍᪉࡛ࡣ⪔స㠃✚ 0.5㹼2 ࢚࣮࣮࢝ࡢᑠつᶍ㎰ᴗ⤒Ⴀࠊ㐺ษ࡞స≀᱂ᇵ᪉ἲ࡟㛵ࡍࡿ▱㆑୙㊊ࠊ࣐࣮ࢣࢸ࢕ࣥࢢࡢ୙㊊ࠊప཰㔞ရ✀ࡢ฼⏝ࠊࢥ࣓௨እ
ࡢస≀࡜ࡢ➇ྜࠊࢥࢫࢺⓗ࡟ຠ⋡ࢆ㧗ࡵࡿᶵᮦࡢ୙㊊ࡀ⪃࠼ࡽࢀࡿࠋ௚᪉࡛ࡣࠊ㝣✄࡜ࡋ࡚40 ୓࣊ࢡࢱ࣮ࣝࠊపᆅ࣭℺₅ᆅ࡜ࡋ࡚ 65 ୓࣊ࢡࢱ࣮ࣝࡀ᱂ᇵྍ⬟㠃✚࡜ࡋ࡚㈿Ꮡࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ୍
᪉ࠊࢣࢽࣖす㒊࡛ࡣኳỈ࡛᱂ᇵࡉࢀࡿᅾ᮶ရ✀ Dourado Prococe㸦1.5 ton/ha㸧ࠊ࠾ࡼࡧỈ✄᱂ᇵࡢ IR2793-80-1㸦3.5 ton/ha㸧ࡢప཰㔞ᛶࠊἢᓊᆅᇦ࡛ࡣࠊKaiso K25 ࡸ ParkisanࠊKR22ࠊKR25
࡞࡝ࡢᅾ᮶ရ✀ࡢ᱂ᇵࡶࠊప఩࡞⏕⏘㔞ࡢཎᅉ࡜࡞ࡗ࡚࠸ࡿ㸦Atera 2006㸧ࠋࢣࢽࣖᅜ❧㎰ᴗ◊✲ᡤ㸦KARI㸧ࡣ༠ຊᶵ㛵࡜ඹྠࡋ࡚ࠊ཰㔞࡜᪭㨧⪏ᛶ࡟㛵ࡍࡿ NERICA ࡢ㐺ᛂᛶヨ㦂ࢆ 11࠿ᡤ࡛ᐇ᪋ࡋࡓࠋࡑࡢ⤖ᯝࠊNERICA11 ࡜ NERICA4 ࡀᬑཬရ✀࡜ࡋ࡚㑅ᢤࡉࢀࡓࠋࡇࡢ 2 ရ✀ࡣ᪭㨧⪏ᛶࡀ㧗ࡃࠊ㧗཰㔞ࢆᚓࡽࢀࠊㄪ⌮≉ᛶࡶඃࢀ࡚࠸ࡿࠋ཰㔞ࡣ 2㹼3 ton/ha ࡛࠶ࡿࠋ௒ᚋࡢㄢ㢟࡜ࡋ࡚ࠊᬑཬရ✀ࢆ㎰ᐙ࡟ᗈࡃᑟධࡋ࡚ࡶࡽ࠺ࡓࡵ࡟࡝ࢇ࡞᮲௳ࢆᥞ࠼ࡿᚲせࡀ࠶ࡿࡢ࠿ศᯒࡍࡿࡇ࡜ࡀᚲせ࡜࡞ࡗ࡚࠸ࡿࠋᢏ⾡ᬑཬẁ㝵࡟⛣⾜ࡍࡿ᫬ᮇࡣ㠀ᖖ࡟㔜せ࡛࠶࠶ࡿࠋࡇࡢẁ㝵࡛ࡣ♫఍⤒῭ⓗ᮲௳ࡢᙳ㡪ࢆ⌮ゎࡍࡿᚲせࡀ࠶ࡿࠋࣈࣥࢦ࣐ᆅᇦ࡛⾜ࢃࢀࡓᡞูணഛㄪᰝࡢ⤖ᯝࡣࠊNERICA ᬑཬࢆಁ㐍ࡍࡿ᮲௳ࠊ࠶ࡿ࠸ࡣጉࡆࡿ᮲௳ࡀᩘከࡃ࠶ࡿࡇ࡜ࢆ
♧၀ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿ㸦Okech J N, Takeya H and Asanuma S, April 2006㸧ࠋࡲࡓࠊ཰㔞ࡸࠊᵝࠎ࡞ࢫࢺࣞ
ࢫ࡟ᑐࡍࡿ⪏ᛶࡢ㧗ࡉࠊ࿡ࡢⰋࡉ࡜࠸ࡗࡓ NERICA ࡢ≉ᛶ࡟㛵ࡍࡿ᝟ሗࡀ୙㊊ࡋ࡚࠸ࡿሙྜ
࡟ NERICA ࡟ᑐࡍࡿ㛵ᚰࡀపࡃ࡞ࡿ࡜࠸࠺⤖ᯝࡶぢࡽࢀࡓࠋࡇࡢ௚࡟ࡶࠊ⏕⏘ࢥࢫࢺࡢ㧗ࡉࠊ⤒㦂୙㊊ࠊ㐺ษ࡞ᶵᮦࡢ୙㊊㸦⢭⡿ᶵ㸧ࠊࢣࢽࣖᅜෆᕷሙ࡟࠾ࡅࡿ㍺ධ⡿࡟ຎࡿᅜ⏘⡿ࡢ➇தຊࠊࣜࢫࢡ᎘ᝏࠊ࡜࠸ࡗࡓࡇ࡜ࡀせ⣲࡜ࡋ࡚ᣲࡆࡽࢀࡿࠋࡉࡽ࡟ࠊ᱂ᇵ㠃✚ࡢ㸯఩ࢆ༨ࡵࡿࢺ
࢘ࣔࣟࢥࢩ࡟ᑐࡋࠊࢥ࣓ࡢሙྜࡣ᱂ᇵ㠃✚࡛㸷఩ࠊ཰ධ㢠࡛ࡣ㸱఩࡛࠶ࡿࠋணഛㄪᰝ࡛ࡣࡇࡢ
࡯࠿ࠊ㎰ᐙࡣࢥ࣓ࡢ✀Ꮚࢆ୺࡟㏆㞄ࡢ㎰ᐙ࠿ࡽศࡅ࡚ࡶࡽ࠺ሙྜࡀከࡃࠊࡇࡢࡇ࡜࠿ࡽ⤌⧊ⓗ࡞✀Ꮚ⏕⏘ࢩࢫࢸ࣒ࡀᏑᅾࡋ࡞࠸ࡇ࡜ࡶ᫂ࡽ࠿࡟࡞ࡗࡓࠋ࢟ࢫ࣒࡜ࣈࢩ࢔࡛⾜ࢃࢀࡓᡞูㄪᰝ
࡛ࡣࠊNERICA ᬑཬ࡟ᑐࡍࡿ⫯ᐃⓗ࣭ྰᐃⓗ࡞⪃࠼᪉ࡀࠊಶேಶேࡢሙྜ࡜ࠊࢢ࣮ࣝࣉࡢሙྜ
࡛㐪࠸ࡀ࠶ࡿࡇ࡜ࢆ⪃៖ࡍࡿᚲせᛶࡀᾋ࠿ࡧୖࡀࡗࡓࠋࡲࡓࠊNERICA ࡜௚ࡢ✐≀࡜ࡢ㛵ಀᛶ㸦➇ྜࠊ⿵ྜࠊ⿵᏶㸧ࢆ⪃៖ࡍࡿᚲせᛶࡶ♧၀ࡉࢀࡓࠋ

ˆ

2006 ᑈ 10 ᳜䃯ⓨᔧᰖǄAt the time of presentation in October 2006.

１
２
３

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Socioeconomic Factors Needed for NERICA Dissemination in Kenya
㻴㼕㼞㼛㼥㼡㼗㼕㻌㼀㼍㼗㼑㼥㼍㻌
Professor
Graduate School of Bioagricultural Sciences
International Cooperation for Center for Agricultural Education (ICCAE)
Nagoya University, Japan㻶㼛㼟㼑㼜㼔㻌㻺㼑㼣㼠㼛㼚㻌㻻㻚㻌㻻㼗㼑㼏㼔
Head of Socio Economics Department
Kenya Agricultural Research Institute (KARI), Kibos Center, Kenya

Abstract
Rice has over the years rapidly increased to become a main food commodity in many Kenyan
households due to increase in population and urbanization (Kennedy and Readon, 1994). A recent
report indicates that between 2002 and 2003 rice consumption increased by 35.2%, and by 2005
production and consumption stood at 85,000 and 310,951 mts respectively, suggesting that thedifference was imported amounting to about $170 million (CBIK, 2005).
The low rice production can be explained on the one hand by the small farm sizes ranging from
0.5 acres to 2acres that farmers cultivate, attributed to lack of knowledge on appropriate crop
husbandry practices, poor marketing, low yielding varieties, competition from other food crops andlack of cost effective equipment. Yet there is a potential area of 400,000 and 650,000 ha for upland
and lowland/irrigated ecosystems respectively, and on the other hand by low average yields ofconventional varieties, Dourado Precoce (1.5 ton/ha) and IR2793-80-1(3.5tons/ha) under rainfed andirrigated cultures, respectively in West Kenya. In the coastal region the conventional varieties growninclude Kaiso K25, Parkisan, KR22 and KR 25 (Atera 2006)
KARI and its partners have carried out NERICA adaptability tests focusing on yield anddrought tolerance in 11 sites that resulted in selection of NERICA 11 and 4 that are being considered
for release. Results have shown that the cultivars are drought tolerant, high yielding and have goodcooking quality. The yields range from 2 to 3 tons per ha. Following the selection of NERICA 11
and 4, it is necessary to carry out analysis of the preconditions of diffusion as a strategy geared
towards achieving high adoption rate.
Moving into technology dissemination phase is a crucial stage in which it is important tounderstand the influence of socio-economic conditions. Preliminary results of the household survey
carried out in Bungoma district indicated that there are a number of preconditions that can promoteor hinder NERICA diffusion (Okech J N, Takeya H and Asanuma S, April 2006). The results include
low interest in NERICA which is attributed to lack of information on its characteristics such as yield,
tolerance to various stresses and taste. Other factors identified were perceived high cost of
production, lack of experience, lack of appropriate equipment (rice mill), low competitiveness of
local rice against imported rice in the domestic market and high-risk aversion. In addition while
rice is ranked 9th compared to maize which is ranked 1st in land allocation, it is ranked 3rd in income
generation priority scale. The preliminary study further revealed farmers obtain rice seed mainly
from neighbor’s suggesting that there is no organized seed production system. Other preliminary
results of the household survey in Kisumu and Busia indicated that we should consider differences
between individual and group perception of constraints (opportunities) for dissemination of NERICA,
and also think about the relation among NERICA and other crops.

- 124 １
２
４Socioeconomic Factors Needed for NERICA Dissemination in Kenya

The low level of rice production in Kenya can be
explained on the one hand severe limitation ofcultivated land with rice, especially irrigated farmland and on the other hand low yields ofconventional varieties, Dourado Precocev (1.5ton/ha)
under rainfed cultures. If farmers in Kenya use
irrigated land and a variety of IR2793-80-1(3.5tons/ha) which is already cultivated in someirrigated areas in Kenya, they can produce much
more rice. There is a potential area of 400,000 and
650,000 ha for upland and lowland/irrigatedenvironments, respectively in Kenya.
Most of Kenyan farms range from 0.5 ha to 2 haunder subsistent farming. They tend to haveinsufficient yield for their subsistence due tounstable climate condition. It is expected to develop
rice production with favorite condition and newvarieties. The issue must be clarified by researchaccompanied with field survey.

1. Background Situation

㻟㻡㻜
㻟㻜㻜
㻞㻡㻜
㻞㻜㻜
㻝㻡㻜
㻝㻜㻜

㼜㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚

Fig. 1

2.

㻞㻜㻜㻠

㻞㻜㻜㻟

㻞㻜㻜㻞

㻞㻜㻜㻝

㻞㻜㻜㻜

㻝㻥㻥㻥

㻝㻥㻥㻤

㻝㻥㻥㻣

㻝㻥㻥㻢

㻝㻥㻥㻡

㻝㻥㻥㻠

㻝㻥㻥㻟

㻝㻥㻥㻞

㻜

㻝㻥㻥㻝

㻡㻜
㻝㻥㻥㻜

㻼 㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻛㻯㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㻔㻝㻜㻜㻜㼠㻕

Rice has over the years rapidly increased to
become a main food commodity in many Kenyan
households. As drawn at Fug.1, consumption of ricein Kenya started an increase since early 1990’s andespecially jumped up from 2000. The change wastaken place by a new trend of consumption custom
in urbanized people and young generation.
But the rice production in Kenya has not yet
developed in 1990’s and early 2000’s. The gap of
the production and consumption of ricesubsequently become expanding very rapidly since1993. The production and consumption of rice in2005 in Kenya stood at 85,000 and 310,951mts,
respectively. It resulted in import of rice andspending of valuable foreign money for the import.
The deficit was imported about $170 million (CBIK,2005).

㼏㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚

Production and Consumption of Rice in Kenya

Necessary survey to clarify preconditionsof NERICA diffusion

2-1. Where has the research of rice in Kenya
come up to?
Rice research in Kenya was initiated in 1980’s atKibos and Mwea Tebere. The adaptive rainfed rice
research conducted between 1991 and 1995 resulted
in the evaluation and selection of 6 upland and 4
lowland rainfed cultivars for rice yield and cooking
quality (Kouko et al 1995).
In a continued effort to develop high yielding
rainfed rice varieties, NERICA was introduced from
West Africa Rice Development Association(WARDA).
The NERICA cultivars have thepotential to increase rainfed rice yield to 3.5 tons/haand irrigated rice yield to 6.0 tons/ha. KARI and
its partners have carried out NERICA adaptability
tests focusing on yield and drought tolerance in 11
sites, resulted in selection of NERICA 11 and 4 thatwere being considered for release in 2006.

2-2. Necessary survey
Following the selection of NERICA 11 and 4, it
became necessary to carry out analysis of thepreconditions of dissemination as a strategy geared
towards achieving high adoption rate.
To get common understanding about the purposeof the survey, there are two points; one is to clarify
the socio economic preconditions for NERICA- 125 １２
５

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

dissemination in Kenya at farm, community, anddistrict levels, another is to find target farmers orgroups, and target communities with positive
characteristics and thinking. Based on such survey
we can make a strategy of NERICA dissemination
into target areas.

2-3. Referable information in Uganda
Factors with positive and significant effect on
NERICA yield were pointed out by Y. Kijima, et al.
(2005). Those are:
1) Experience in growing rice, especially
NERICA
2) Farmers learn desirable cultivation practices
from their own experience under less extension
service3) Maintenance of soil fertility through proper
crop rotations (soil-nutrient responsive)4) Timing of planting rice under rainwater
shortage (large variations depending on therainfall)5) Favorable access to market and rice millers6) Flat areas
7) Community based seed selection andpropagation system
Regarding the factor 7th above-mentioned, theAfrican Rice Center already developed a three-year
process so that farmers could evaluate the NERICA
varieties for themselves under their own climaticconditions. This consisted of establishing a ricegarden in a respected farmer' s village that compared
many varieties of rice including NERICA. At theend of the season, this plot provided seed forfarmers to try five varieties on their own acreages.
After the second growing season, farmers wereasked to select only three varieties and to pay for theseed. Experiences were compared at harvest timeand key learning about agronomic practices shared.
By the third year, the superior characteristics of
NERICA rice were appreciated and adopted fromagronomic and economic perspectives.
In my survey in Aug. 11, 2005, a farmer told me“if somebody takes a good result, he goes to thefarm quickly, and leans how to take it from thefarming” in Busia near the boarder to Uganda. He
was eager to have NERICA varieties.

2-4. Survey of objective conditions

The survey of objective conditions used to becomposed of the followings:
1) Natural conditions in each area for possibilityof growing NERICA: rainfall (volume anddeficit seasons), soil (fertility of low, midst andhigh land), topography of farmlands (slope,flat), temperature (cultivation times, taste)2) Technical factors of NERICA: input-output
coefficient of each variety on natural conditions
3) Social conditions: extension activities,
community based organization, availability touse micro credit
4) Infrastructural conditions: availability topurchase seeds, fertilizer, access to rice millers

2-5. Survey of farmers’ conditions
The survey also has to clarify farmers’
preconditions for NERICA dissemination:1) Land ownership (paddy, upland, fallow, virgin;size, topography), borrow and lend of land2) Times of land use per year, kinds of crops, crop
rotation, purposes of production (selfconsumption or cash earning)3) The number of family members and labors,working members in agriculture and outsidejobs4) Purchase and input production materials (seeds,
fertilizer, insecticides, tools, machines),
contract of works5) Technological level䠄experience of rice and
NERICA production, schooling years, yield of
main crops䠅6) Sales of agricultural products䠄city, town, ruralmarket; middleman䠅7) Business size (sales of products and purchase ofmaterials in money, credits, risk management䠅8) Collection of information䠄from whom, media䠅
9) Group or corporate activities䠄training,
workshop, cooperative works, cooperative sales,
rehabilitation of canals or roads䠅

2-6. Survey of farmer’s subjective conditions
Furthermore, the survey must to collectinformation of farmer’s knowledge and attitudeconcerned to NERICA. For example:
1) Interest: strong, moderate, nothing2) Need for cash or self-consumption3) Knowledge: soil-nutrient responsive, yield, cost4) Technology: drill seeding, timing, water
management, crop rotation- 126 １
２
６Socioeconomic Factors Needed for NERICA Dissemination in Kenya

5) Crop relations: competitive, complement,
supplement
6) Important matters for success: ranking ontechnology, seeds, fertilizer, water, miller,market should be collected by the survey
In addition, we should also survey on important
constrains such as:1) Less availability to purchase improved varieties
2) Lack of knowledge
3) Lack of technology4) Lack of water management and conservation
systems
5) Lack of low-cost equipment for land
preparation, sowing, weeding, harvesting andthreshing6) Lack of extension services7) Lack of rice miller
8) Lack of credit for farmers, Low price
We use a ranking method among these factors forevaluating constraints.
We need information of the competitiveness toimported rice in price or taste, too. Consumers do
not necessarily buy domestic rice, if domestic rice
has high price or less favorite taste comparing with
imported rice in the market.

3. Results from one survey in Bungoma
3-1. One survey
One survey was done in April, 2006 in Bungoma
and Busia to clarify the precondition of farmers for
NERICA dissemination. The survey used a methodof interview with questionnaire to farmers was

Table 1

implemented; around 6 young interviewers in eacharea were trained as enumerators through one day
course. Then farmers were interviewed individuallyby the interviews including the authors. The numberof farmers selected through random sampling
method was both of 26 in Bungoma and Busia.
Farmers’ meeting was held for giving information of
NERICA to them in each area. Here an analysis of
those data in Bungoma was described.

3-2. Some features of paddy farmers
When interviewed farmers were divided into two
categories in term of paddy farming; paddy farmers
and non-paddy farmers, we can make theircharacteristics clear in Table 1. in this case, paddy
means cultivable land for rice. When we observed
actual paddy, it sure had small dikes but they havenot maintained well as well as canal in that area.
Those paddies have not had any water. In that sense,
paddy seemed not to promise stable and highproductivity of rice production in Bungoma.
Paddy farmers comparing with non-paddy
farmers in Bungoma had have relatively small
household members and adult family members.
The decision maker of paddy farmers was a little
younger than non-paddy farmers and had taken higheducation. Paddy farmers also have relatively highrate of non-agricultural jobs. In other words, paddy
farmers could take high education and consequently
get high rate of non-agricultural jobs. Paddy farmers
implemented paddy farming and subsequently
suppose to obtain better conditions than non paddy
farmers.

Paddy and non-paddy farmers in Bungoma
Householdmembers

Adult family
members

Age ofdecision
maker

Male
(%)

Secondary or
higher education(%)

Non-agr. job(%)

Paddy Farmers

7.7

3.5

42.7

76.9

53.8

53.8

Non-Paddy Farmers

11.0

6.1

44.8

84.6

46.2

38.5

Source: Survey in April 2006.
Note: The number of Samples in case of paddy and non-paddy farmers is 13 and 13, respectively.

- 127 １２
７

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8think about the productivity of their farmland. Paddy
farming in Kenya used to have relatively higher
productivity and higher income than non-paddy
farming in the same unit of farmland. If it isapplicable to this analysis, we can estimate that
paddy farmers have better production and income inagriculture than non paddy farmers, because paddy
farmers have twice areas of paddy under the similar
size of total farmland.
Bungoma is not better for rice production due tounstable rainfall even though farmers want tocultivate it. In this area maize is the most main cropand bean is the second main crop in acres. The
allocated area for rice was the third position in bothtypes of farmers, but rice did not contribute to cash
earning in Bugoma. For cash earning, sugarcane,finger millet and tomatoes added to maize take more
important position for paddy farmers, on the otherground nuts and sweet potatoes have significant fornon paddy farmers. Total amount of products sales
for both types of farmers are almost similar. But
total income is higher for paddy farmers than non
paddy farmers. That is 75, 615 KShs for paddy
farmers, and 53,076 KShs for non paddy farmers.

Paddy farmers have similar working days in one
year to non-paddy farmers, as shown in Table 2.
They have a little bit small working days inagriculture than non paddy farmers. But they havemuch more experience in agriculture and rice
farming. They have gotten much more training, i.e.,on the one hand 46% of paddy farmers had training
and 1.4 times of such training, on the other 31% and
0.9 times in case of non paddy farmers. We can also
notice that paddy farmers suppose to have better
talent for farming and obtaining other jobs.

3-3. Cultivating areas of farmland by paddy
farmers
Table 3 shows cultivating areas in 2006 in paddy
farmers and non paddy farmers. Comparing those
two types of farmers, we can understand size of theirfarming. Paddy farmers have averagely around twiceof paddy comparing to non paddy farmers.
Oppositely non paddy farmers have around twice
areas of upland with midst and steep slope. Both of
two types of farmers have similar size of fallow
added with virgin farmland and subsequently paddy
farmers have almost similar but a little bit large sizeof farmland in total with non paddy farmers, as
shown in table 3. Depending on these data, we canTable 2

Period of agricultural experience and training in Bungoma
Working days
per year

Working daysin agriculture

Agriculture
engagement(Years)Paddy rice
(Years)Upland rice
(Years)

335

270

21.8

6.1

0.6

46.2

1.4

Non-Paddy Farmers
336
Source: Survey in April 2006

284

20.8

2.3

1.5

30.8

0.9

Paddy Farmers

Table 3Cultivating Areas of Farmland (acres)

Farmland

Paddy Farmer

Non-paddy Farmer

Paddy

1.77

0.85

Flat

0.31

0.31

Midst

0.77

1.39

Steep

0.00

0.10

Fallow

0.62

0.35

Virgin

0.04

0.35

Total

3.51

3.35

Crop rotation

100%

100%

UplandNote: Paddy means cultivable land for rice

- 128 １
２
８

Non-agr. Job(%)

Socioeconomic Factors Needed for NERICA Dissemination in Kenya

3-4. Factors of affecting farmer’s decision toaccept NERICA
What are factors to affect farmer’s decision for
accepting NERICA? A regression analysis was done
for clarifying the factors, although the number ofsamples is not enough for statistics. According totable 5, a variable of interest has a positive andhigher coefficient with 1% level of significance.
Other variable of production cost has negative
parameter with 1% level of significance. A factor of

Table 4experience of rice farming has positive relation andanother factor of age has highly negative regression
coefficient with both of 5% level of significant
respectively. In other words, young farmers having
interest in NERICA and experience of riceproduction should become the target of extension at
first when we try to disseminate NERICA to farmers.
The factor of production cost needs to economize
much more for farmers.

Rank of each commodity based on areas and sales in Bungoma
Paddy Farmers

Crop

Non-Paddy Farmers

Areas(Acres)

Rank

Sales
(KShs)Rank

Area(Acres)

Rank

Sales
(KShs)

Rank

Maize

2.90

1

14274

1

2.10

1

14885

1

Beans

0.71

2

2577

5

1.32

2

4008

2

Sorghum

0

0.17

6

2235

5

Sweet potatoes

0.15

6

1031

0.24

5

2882

4

Bananas

0.06

9

0

0.32

4

757

10

Soybean

0.15

6

0

0.17

6

1854

7

Finger millet

0.17

5

3585

3

0.13

9

2123

6

Tomatoes

0.21

4

3302

4

0.06

11

1731

2

Rice

0.47

3

1392

9

0.59

3

894

8

Cassava

0.13

8

1754

7

0.06

11

369

11

Groundnuts

0.06

9

1923

6

0.20

8

3396

3

Kales

0.04

12

346

10

0.09

10

885

9

Sugarcane

0.06

9

3842

2

0

0

Cotton

0.02

13

47

11

0

0

0
8

Source :compiled by authors

Table 5

Factors of affecting farmer’s decision to accept NERICA
Variable

CoefficientsInterest

0.586***

Production Costs

ˉ0.255***Experience

0.260**

Ageˉ0.790**Sex

0.420*

Education

0.002*

Note: ***: 1%, **: 5%, *10% with significant level- 129 １２
９

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 83-5. Important factors and major
constraints for NERICA dissemination
Farmers were questioned what the importantfactors and major constraints for NERICA
dissemination are?
Farmers thought about important factors
shown the figures in table 6. The factor of skill wasthought as the important factor by 10 informants
among 13 ones. Selling price was the second
important factor and milling machine maybe thethird.
Concerning to the major constraints, knowledge
was the most major constraint due to a newtechnology for the farmers in Bungoma. Farmers
also thought skill and market for NERICA
introduction were almost insufficient to them. It
shows that the information and practice of NERICA
have not been provided to farmers here yet so

Table 6farmers want to know what is NERICA and how to
cultivate it. Milling machine was also thought as amajor constraint.
In this regard, let give a glance to ownership ofequipment and machine here. Table 7 shows that all
equipment and machines used to be hired when
farmers use them for their farming. In this regard, toreduce of those hired cost must be expected foralmost farmers. On the contrary, it should also
notice that milling and threshing machine are owned
with one quarter. The farmers who owned suchmachines maybe contact to treat relevant works with
farmers who did not own them. Concerning topumps, 35% of the farmers borrowed them from theneighbors. We should understand that when farmers
in Bungoma implement rice production, they have to
do under these conditions.

Important Factors and Major Constraints for NERICA

Important Factor for
NERICA

Number of HighRanking

Major Constraint

Number of High Ranking

Skill

10

Skill

7

Fertilizer

3

Knowledge

9

Water

0

Water Resource

2

Soil

3

Extension Service

2

Crop Rotation

2

Threshing Mac.

3

Threshing Mach.

2

Milling Machine

4

Milling Machine

6

Credit3

Credit1

Selling Price

7

Market7

Source: Survey in April 2006
Note: The numbers in the table show high ranked responds by interviewees who belong to the paddy
farmers group with 13 samples. For example, 10 mean that 10 interviewees pointed the factor as
important one.

Table 7

Percentage Response to Equipment Ownership
Equipment and Machines (%)

Ownership
Pumps

Milling

Threshing

Tractor

Self

11

23

23

0

Hired

54

65

58

85

Neighbor

35

12

19

15

Total

100

100

100

100

Source: Survey in April 2006

- 130 １
３０

Socioeconomic Factors Needed for NERICA Dissemination in Kenya

Current materials for rice production such as
seeds and fertilizer were obtained by farmers in
Bungoma as shown in table 8. Maize seed, chemicalfertilizer and pesticide were bought by farmers
generally. Manure used to take by themselves inmost cases. On the other, rice seed obtained 50%
from the neighbors and 20% by themselves. Farmers
bought only 30% at market. When people try todisseminate NERICA technology, this kind of
farmers’ behavior should be thought about.

Table 8In addition, making good soil fertility
contributes to better harvest in agriculture, as wellknown. Farmers in Bungoma used to feed livestock
for tanking meat and manure shown in table 9.
Cattle feeding is very general for farmers. Theyuse not only cattle’s draft for their farming but also
take meat, milk and manure. So farmers do notnecessarily have manure the amount of manure
maybe insufficient to increase rice yield or lessdeveloped skill for soil fertilization.

Response to sources of farm inputs
Response (%)
Farm Input
Self

Buy

Neighbor

Maize Seed

15

81

4

Rice Seed

19

30

51

Chemical Fertilizer

-

85

15

Manure73

125Pesticide

1

96

3

Source: Survey in April 2006

Table 9Type of livestock and their feeding purposesType of Livestock

Purpose for keeping livestock (ƻ)

Mean number
Kept
Meat

Milk

Eggs

Manureƻƻ

Chicken14

ƻ

Cattle

4

ƻ

Goats

1

ƻ

ƻ

Sheep

1

ƻ

ƻ

Pigs

1

ƻ

ƻ

ƻ

Source: Survey in April 2006

- 131 １
３
１

ƻ

Draft

ƻ

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

4. Conclusions
1) An analysis of decision making regressed on
selected variables indicated that interest,
experience and sex can positively affect toacceptance of NERICA significantly, on thecontrary age and production costs suppose toaffect negatively efficient dissemination of
NERICA technology.
2) Rice production in Bungoma has not been stable
and high productivity comparing other crops,
even though paddy farmers have positive attitude
to rice farming. Rice production was considered
as both food and cash crop with emphasis laid on
self consumption.
3) Farmers obtain rice seed mainly from neighbors.
It suggests that there is no organized seedproduction system.
4) Farmers have not yet understood NERICA
technology in almost. They require skill,
knowledge and market as well as millingmachine. So to achieve effective diffusion of
NERICA technology, there are needs not only toensure availability of high quality seed, but also
to provide sufficient workshops throughextension works. Opportunities are available forincreasing rice production through participatory
and effective diffusion of NERICA technology.
5) To achieve these Governmental interventions istherefore necessary to address identified
constraints which include lack of knowledge of
NERICA, inadequate farmer support policies,
high cost of farm inputs and lack of appropriate
equipment.

- 132 １
３
２Socioeconomic Factors Needed for NERICA Dissemination in Kenya

Socioeconomic Factors Needed for
NERICA Dissemination in Kenya
20th October, 2006
Hiroyuki Takeya, Nagoya University&
Newton Okech, KARI Kibos

㻟㻡㻜
㻟㻜㻜
㻞㻡㻜
㻞㻜㻜
㻝㻡㻜
㻝㻜㻜
㻡㻜

㼜㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚

㻞㻜㻜㻠

㻞㻜㻜㻟

㻞㻜㻜㻞

㻞㻜㻜㻝

㻞㻜㻜㻜

㻝㻥㻥㻥

㻝㻥㻥㻤

㻝㻥㻥㻣

㻝㻥㻥㻢

㻝㻥㻥㻡

㻝㻥㻥㻠

㻝㻥㻥㻟

㻝㻥㻥㻞

㻝㻥㻥㻝

㻜
㻝㻥㻥㻜

㻼㼞㼛 㼐㼡 㼏 㼠㼕㼛 㼚 㻛 㻯 㼛 㼚 㼟㼡 㼙 㼜㼠㼕㼛 㼚 㻌㻔㻝 㻜 㻜 㻜 㼠㻕

Fig. 1 Production and consumption of rice in Kenya

㼏㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚

Rice production has rapidly increased for these years and become a main foodcommodity in many Kenyan households, due to its urbanization and increase inpopulation.

- 133 １
３
３

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

1. Background situation
The production and consumption of rice in 2005 in Kenya stoodat 85,000 and 310,951mts, respectively. The deficit ofapproximately $170 million (CBIK, 2005) was covered by import.
The low rice production can be explained on the one hand by thelimited cultivated land for rice and on the other hand the low
average yields of conventional varieties, Dourado Precoce (1.5
tons/ha) and IR2793-80-1(3.5tons/ha), under the rainfed andirrigated cultures, respectively.
There are potential areas of 400,000 and 650,000 ha, for upland
and lowland/irrigated environments, respectively.
Most of Kenyan farms range from 0.5 ha to 2 ha under theirsubsistent farming.

2. Necessary survey to clarify preconditions of NERICA diffusion
2-1. Where has the research of rice in Kenya comes up to?
• Rice research in Kenya was initiated in 1980’s at Kibos and Mwea Tebere.
The adaptive rainfed rice research conducted between 1991 and 1995
resulted in the evaluation and selection of 6 upland and 4 lowland rainfed
cultivars for grain yield and cooking quality (Kouko et al 1995).
• In a continued effort to develop high yielding rainfed rice varieties,
NERICA was introduced from West Africa Rice Development Association(WARDA). The NERICA cultivars have the potential to increase rainfed
rice yield to 3.5 tons/ha and irrigated rice yield to 6.0 tons/ha. KARI and its
partners have carried out NERICA adaptability tests focusing on yield anddrought tolerance in 11 sites, then resulted in selection of NERICA 11 and 4
that were being considered for release in 2006.

2-2. Necessary survey
Following the selection of NERICA 11 and 4, it became necessary to carry out
analysis of the preconditions of diffusion as a strategy geared towards
achieving high adoption rate.

- 134 １
３
４Socioeconomic Factors Needed for NERICA Dissemination in Kenya

2-3. To get common understanding about
the purpose of the survey• To clarify socioeconomic preconditions for
NERICA dissemination in Kenya at farms,
communities and in district levels.
• To find the target farmers/groups/communities withpositive characteristics and thinking.
• To plan strategies for NERICA dissemination into
the target areas.

2-4. Referable information in Uganda
Factors producing positive and significant effects on
NERICA yields (Y. Kijima, et al. 2005)– Experience in growing rice, especially in NERICA– Farmers can learn about desirable cultivation practices
from their own experience under less extension service.
– Maintenance of soil fertility through proper crop rotations(soil-nutrient responsive)– Timing of planting rice under rainwater shortage (large
variations depending on the rainfall)– Favorable access to market and rice millers– Flat areas- 135 １
３
５

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 82-5. Referable information (continued)
Community-based seed system• The African Rice Center developed a three-year process so that farmers
could evaluate the NERICA varieties for themselves under their own
climatic conditions. This consisted of establishing a rice garden in a
respected farmer' s village that compared many varieties of rice including
NERICA. At the end of the season, this plot provided seed for farmers to
try five varieties on their own acreages.
• After the second growing season, farmers were asked to select only threevarieties and to pay for the seed. Their experience was compared during
harvest time, and the key learning about agronomic practices were shared.
By the third year, the superior characteristics of NERICA rice wereappreciated and adopted from their agronomic and economic perspectives.
• A farmer told me “if somebody yields a good result, he goes, observes andlearns quickly how to take it from the farmer’s farming” in Busia. Aug. 11,
2005.

2-6. Objective conditions survey1) Natural conditions in each area for possibility ofgrowing NERICA
Rainfall: volume, deficit seasons
Soil: fertility in each land block (low, middle, high)Topography of farmlands such as slope: flat
Temperature: cultivation times, taste
2) Technical factors of NERICA
Input-output coefficient on a variety of natural conditions
3) Social conditions
Extension activities, community-based organization,
availability to micro credit
4) Infrastructural conditions
Availability of seeds and fertilizer, access to rice
millers- 136 １
３
６Socioeconomic Factors Needed for NERICA Dissemination in Kenya

2-7. Farmers’ conditions survey1) Land ownership (paddy, upland, fallow, virgin; size, topography), landborrowing and lending
2) Time period of land use per year, kinds of crops, crop rotation, purpose of
production (self-consumption or to make cash)3) The number of family members/labors, workforce members for agriculture andoutside jobs
4) Purchase and input of production materials (seeds, fertilizer, insecticides, tools,
machines), employment contracts5) Technological level䠄experience in rice or NERICA production, schoolingyears, yields of main crops䠅6) Sales channel of agricultural products䠄city, town, rural market, middleman,
contract䠅7) Business size (product sales and material purchase in money or credits, risk
management䠅8) Collection of information 䠄from who/which media䠅
9) Group or corporate activities䠄training, workshops, cooperative works,
cooperative sales, rehabilitation of canals/roads䠅

2-8. Farmer’s subjective conditions survey
Concerning NERICA:
1) Interest: high, moderate, no-interest
2) Need for: cash, self-consumption3) Knowledge: good, moderate, not good
soil-nutrient responsive, yields, cost4) Technology: high, moderate, low
drill-seeding, timing, water management, crop rotation
5) Crop relations: competitive, complements,
supplements
6) Important matters for success: ranking
technology, seeds, fertilizer, water, millers, markets- 137 １３
７

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 82-9. Farmer’s subjective conditions (2)Important constrains: ranking
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•

Less availability of improved varieties
Lack of knowledge
Lack of technology
Lack of water management and conservation systems
Lack of low-cost equipment for land preparation, sowing,
weeding, harvesting, threshing.
Lack of extension services
Lack of rice millers
Lack of credit for farmers
Low price
Competitiveness in the market: price or taste

3-1. Locations of survey areas:
Bungoma, Kisumu, and Busia- 138 １
３
８Socioeconomic Factors Needed for NERICA Dissemination in Kenya

3-2. Training enumerators

3-3. Interviewing farmers- 139 １３
９

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 83-4. Farmers Meeting for exchanging
information about NERICA

3-5. Data analysis
Table 1

Paddy and non-paddy farmers in Bungoma
Householdmembers

Adult family
members

Age ofdecision
maker

Male
(%)

Secondary or
highereducation (%)

Non-agr.
Job
(%)

Paddy
Farmers

7.7

3.5

42.7

76.9

53.8

53.8

Non-Paddy
Farmers

11.0

6.1

44.8

84.6

46.2

38.5

Source: Survey in April 2006
Note: The number of samples: paddy and non-paddy farmers are
13 and 13 respectively.

- 140 １
４０

Socioeconomic Factors Needed for NERICA Dissemination in Kenya

Table 2 Time periods of agricultural experience andtraining in Bungoma
Workingdays peryear

Workingdays peryear inagriculture

Agriculture(years)Paddy
rice(years)Uplandrice(years)

Paddy
Farmers335

270

Non-Paddy
Farmers

336

284

Training(%)(Times)

21.8

6.1

0.6

46.2

1.4

20.8

2.3

1.5

30.8

0.9

Source: Survey in April 2006

Table 3 Farmland areas owned/managed by farmers

Paddy Farmer
1.77(acres)Non-paddy Farmer
0.85

Flat
Middle
Steep

0.31
0.77
0.00

0.31
1.39
0.10

Total
Crop rotation

0.62
0.04
3.51
100%

0.35
0.35
3.35
100%

Farmland
Paddy
UplandFallow
Virgin- 141 １４
１International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Table 4 Ranking of commodity items based on the mean land
allocations and associated mean gross-incomes in each areas
Mean land
allocation
Crop(Acres)
Rank
Maize
2.5
1
Beans
1.1
2
Sorghum
0.5
3
Sweet potatoes
0.2
4
Bananas0.19
5Soybean
0.16
6Finger millet
0.15
7Tomatoes
0.14
8
Rice
0.13
9
Cassava
0.1
10Groundnuts
0.09
11
Kales
0.06
12
Sugarcane
0.03
13
Cotton0.01
14Compliedbyresearchers
Source:Source: Complied by the researchers

Mean grossincome(KShs)
14030
2853
1143
1956
378
926
2659
7708
3193
1061
1162
615
1921
23

Table 5 Maize production in Bungoma
Maize
Maize Area
production(acres)
(t)

Rank
1
4
9
6
13
11
5
2
3
10
8
12
7
14

acres, t, %Maize
yileds(t)Homeconsum
ption

(KSs)

(%)

town

middlemanconsumer

Sale

Channel (%)

Paddy Farmers

2.9

17.3

5.96

44

14,275

56

18

55

27

Non-Paddy Farmers

2.1

22.8

10.86

52

14,885

48

18

64

18

Source: Survey in April 2006

- 142 １
４
２Socioeconomic Factors Needed for NERICA Dissemination in Kenya

Table 6 Factors possibly affect farmer’s decision-

making to accept and adopt NERICA
Variable

Coefficients䠌䠊䠑䠔䠒***

Interest䠉䠌䠊䠎䠑䠑***Production Costs

䠌䠊䠎䠒䠌**

ExperienceAge䠉䠌䠊䠓䠕䠌**Sex䠌䠊䠐䠎䠌*

Education䠌䠊䠌䠌䠎*

Source: Survey in April 2006
Note: The significance levels are indicated as *** 1%, ** 5%, and * 10%.
Adj. R2: 0.73

Table 7

Type of livestock and their feeding purposesType of
Mean
Livestock number kept

Purpose
meat

milk

eggs

manure**Chickens

14*

Cattle

4

*

Goats

1

*

*

Sheep

1

*

*

Pigs

1

*

*

*

Source: Survey in April 2006
* Purpose of keeping livestock- 143 １
４
３

*

draft

*

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Response percentage on sources of farm inputs

Table 8

Farm Input

Response percentage (%)
Self

Buy

Neighbors

Maize seed

15

81

4

Rice seed

19

30

51

Chemical fertilizer

-

85

15

Manure73

125Pesticide

1

96

3

Source: Survey in April 2006

Table 9

Response percentage on equipment ownership
Equipment (%)

Ownership

Pumps

Milling

Threshing

Tractor

Self

11

23

23

0

Hire

54

65

58

85

Neighbors

35

12

19

15

Total

100

100

100

100

Source: Survey in April 2006

- 144 １
４
４Socioeconomic Factors Needed for NERICA Dissemination in Kenya

Table 10

Important factors and major constraints
regarding NERICA

Important factor for Number of high
NERICAranking

Major constraint

Number of highranking

Skill

10

Skill

7

Fertilizer

3

Knowledge

9

Water

0

Water resource

2

Soil

3

Extension service

2

Crop rotation

2

Threshing machine

3

Threshing machine

2

Milling machine

4

Milling machine

6

Credit3

Credit1

Selling price

7

Market7

Source: Survey in April 2006
Note: The numbers in this table indicate the high ranked responses from interviewees who belong to
the paddy-farmers’ group with 13 samples.

4. Conclusions
1) Factors regressing their decision making on the selectedvariables indicated: interest, experience, sex andeducation can positively affect their decision making toaccept NERICA; and age and production costs cansignificantly and negatively affect that.
2) Rice is considered as a food and also a cash crop; their
purpose in generating income is emphasized. Rice isranked 9th and 3rd in terms of land use and income
generation respectively.
3) Farmers can obtain the rice seeds mainly fromneighbors; it is suggested that there is no organized seedproduction system.

- 145 １４
５

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

4. Conclusions (continued)
4) In order to achieve effective diffusion of NERICA, it isrequired to ensure the availability of high quality seeds.
Opportunities are available for increasing rice production
through participatory and effective diffusion of NERICA.
5) Achieving these government interventions therefore
needs to address identified constraints such as lack ofknowledge about NERICA, inadequate farmer support
policies, high cost of farm inputs, and lack of appropriate
equipment.

5. Necessary analysis on marketing andcompetitiveness of rice sugarcane as a cash
crop in the Migori district- 146 １
４
６Socioeconomic Factors Needed for NERICA Dissemination in Kenya

ឋွࣖሉ
3WGUVKQP CPF #PUYGT 5GUUKQP䜿䝙䝲䛻䛚䛡䜛䝛䝸䜹⡿ᬑཬ䛻ලഛ䛩䜉䛝♫఍⤒῭ⓗせ⣲Socioeconomic Factors for NERICA Dissemination in Kenya➉㇂㻌 ⿱அ㻌 㻌 Hiroyuki Takeyaྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ኱Ꮫ㝔⏕࿨㎰Ꮫ◊✲⛉ᩍᤵ䠋㎰Ꮫᅜ㝿ᩍ⫱༠ຊ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊㛗Director, International Cooperation Center for Agricultural Education (ICCAE)
Professor, Graduate School of Bioagricultural Sciences, Nagoya University&䝆䝵䝉䝣䞉䝙䝳䞊䝖䞁䞉O 䞉䜸䜿䝏㻌 㻌 Joseph Newton O. Okech䜿䝙䜰ᅜ❧㎰ᴗ◊✲ᡤ䜻䝪䝇䝉䞁䝍䞊♫఍⤒῭◊✲㒊㛗Head, Socio Economics, Kenya Agricultural Research Institute (KARI) -Kibos Center, Kenya
ྖ఍䠖㻌 ᮡᮏ㻌 ඘㑥㻌 Chair person: Mitsukuni Sugimotoྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫᅜ㝿ᩍ⫱༠ຊ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊㻌 ෸ᩍᤵ
Associate Professor, ICCAE, Nagoya University

Sugimoto, Chair:Thank you very much Professor Takeya, about how the Kenyan farmers
are introducing NERICA varieties. From the floor, are there any questions
for Professor Takeya?

Ishii:Your background situation, the Kenyan situation, you have potential areasof 0.4 million for upland and 0.65 million for lowland. My question is,though I know your target is NERICA dissemination, for sustainable riceproduction, how do you think about the priority when comparing the upland
and lowland?

Takeya:It’s really difficult question for me, because this information comes from
KARI Kibos and I’m not sure about the actual conditions of targeting areas
with high possibility. I’m sorry for that. At least I can say that the staff of
KARI Kibos which is the major research institution want to disseminate
NERICA broadly not only into lowland but also upland. MAFF of Kenya has
been thinking to disseminate NERICA to upland because NERICA can havehigh possibility to grow well even on upland.
Dr. Onyango, could you help me, if you have some ideas or information on
this question?

Sugimoto, Chair:
Are there any questions or comments from other participants?

Yamauchi:In Table 6, you showed us the results, how and what factors the farmers
took when they accept NERICA varieties. The results of your survey showedthat the factors such as lower cost, longer experience, and younger age would
positively affect their decision making on selecting NERICA varieties. That

- 147 １４
７International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

is how I understand. You also showed the factor of sex, men and women.
Which are more interested in introducing NERICA?

Takeya:For the factor of ‘ sex’ which would affect farmer’s decision as to whether
or not they accept and adopt NERICA, we put ‘ 1’ to men, and ‘ 0’ to women.
So, the results of this multi-regression analysis is read as: ‘ 0.42’ means‘ positive’ effect on their adoption of NERICA cultivation with the coefficientof 0.42 when the decision maker in cultivation is a male farmer. When thedecision maker is a female farmer, this calculation does not indicate anything.
I should try another calculation putting ‘ 1’ to women and ‘ 0’ to men. But I
am sorry I don’t have such results here.

Yamauci:
I think the most important factor is their interest in NERICA. And myquestion is, what causes or what makes the farmers interested in NERICA?
What is the factor that makes the farmers interested in it? What does the“interest” mean here?

Takeya:Thank you for the important question. When we interviewed the farmers
to question on NERICA cultivation, some farmers did not have muchinformation about NERICA. But they have little information such as droughttolerance or early maturity. Even if they don’t have such information, theywould have keen interest in NERICA introduction. In our interviews to some
farmers, they showed their interest in NERICA and asked us, ‘ What is
NERICA? ’, ‘ What is the main characteristics of NERICA? ’ etc. Once they
are given such information of NERICA characteristics, they would think theywant to introduce NERICA as early as possible. So, if the farmer answered
so, we put ‘ 1’ to this factor, ‘ interest’. If they didn’t have any interest even if
they heard of such information, we put ‘ 0’. Then, we calculated like thisresult.

Sugimoto, Chair:
Any other questions?
Regarding Professor Yamauchi’s question,
Professor Onyango will give us additional comments.

Onyango:Thank you. I would like to make a comment about Prof. Yamauchi’scomment about men and women. Actually the problem we have is that, it is
the women who are actually more active in agriculture. The women according
to our statutory set up do not own land. In other words you might have groups
of women who want to participate in NERICA cultivation. Since they don’t
have land, they have to get permission from their husbands. If you look at myabstract where I am talking about the land tenure system which needs to bechanged, women can be empowered to own land. That’s one of the major
reasons, which is the land ownership and production. But NERICA activities
are more active with women groups than men groups. Women are the main
NERICA cultivators. The other question about the land acreage:
I think the trend is going towards the upland production rather than
irrigated. The kind of infrastructure which goes with the paddy rice production
is rather expensive for most small holder farmers. Because these problems,
most farmers tend to go for upland rice production, based on rainfall but if- 148 １
４
８Socioeconomic Factors Needed for NERICA Dissemination in Kenya

there is any irrigation, it will be by gravity from rainfall harvested water orfrom small streams. The are three rice irrigation systems for lowland rice in
Kenya which are situated in Ahero, West Kano and Bunyala in Western
Kenya, Mwea Tabere in Central and Bura in North Eastern Kenya, but all ofthem are performing under capacity. In Western Kenya electricity if used topump water and as the cost of electricity goes up, it becomes expensive tosupply water while in Central and North Eastern Kenya, gravity irrigation isused but during droughts the level of rivers go down. In a nut shell, we aremoving towards upland condition.

Sugimoto, Chair:Thank you very much.
Professor Takeya.

Any other questions?

- 149 １
４
９

Thank you very much,

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Profile➉㇂ ⿱அ

Hiroyuki Takeyaྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ኱Ꮫ㝔⏕࿨㎰Ꮫ◊✲⛉ᩍᤵ䠋㎰Ꮫᅜ㝿ᩍ⫱༠ຊ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊㛗
䠄2006 ᖺ 10 ᭶ㅮ₇ᙜ᫬䠅Director, International Cooperation Center for Agricultural Education (ICCAE)
Professor, Graduate School of Bioagricultural Sciences,
Nagoya University, Japan
(at the time of presentation, October 2006)
Contact:

Graduate School of Bioagricultural Sciences
Nagoya University
Furo-cho, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya 464-8601, Japan
Tel: + 81-52-789-4022
Fax: + 81-52-789-4022
E-mail: sdtakeya@ agr.nagoya-u.ac.jp

1973 ᖺྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ኱Ꮫ㝔㎰Ꮫ◊✲⛉༤ኈㄢ⛬㎰Ꮫᑓᨷ‶஢䚹1973 ᖺ 4 ᭶᪥ᮏᏛ⾡᣺⯆఍ዡບ◊✲ဨ䛻䛺䛳䛯ᚋ䚸1973 ᖺ 10 ᭶ྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫ㒊ຓᡭ䛻᥇⏝䛥䜜䚸㒔ᕷ໬䞉ᕤᴗ໬䛸㎰Ẹᒙศゎ䛾◊✲䛷 1976 ᖺ㎰Ꮫ༤ኈ(ྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ)䜢ᤵ୚䛥䜜䛯䚹ḟ䛔䛷㎰ᮧປാᕷሙ䛸වᴗ㎰ᴗ䛾෌⦅䛾◊✲䚸୪䜃䛻㎰ᴗ䞉㎰ᮧᇶ┙ᩚഛᢞ㈨䛾⤒῭ຠᯝ䛾◊✲䛻ᚑ஦䚹1989 ᖺ 4 ᭶ྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫ㒊ຓᩍᤵ䛻᪼௵䛧䚸Ỉ⏣㎰ᴗ䛾ᢸ䛔ᡭ◊✲䛺䛹䛻ᚑ஦䚹1992 ᖺ 4 ᭶ྠᏛ㒊ᩍᤵ䛻᪼௵䛧䛯䚹1998 ᖺ 4
᭶䛛䜙 2000 ᖺ 3 ᭶ྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫホ㆟ဨ䜢ົ䜑䚸1999 ᖺ 4 ᭶኱Ꮫ㝔㔜Ⅼ໬䛻క䛔䚸ྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ኱Ꮫ
㝔⏕࿨㎰Ꮫ◊✲⛉ᩍᤵ䛸䛺䜛䚹1999 ᖺ 4 ᭶䛛䜙 2007 ᖺ 3 ᭶䜎䛷ྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫᅜ㝿ᩍ⫱༠ຊ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊㛗䜢ే௵䛧䚸2009 ᖺ 3 ᭶䛾ᐃᖺ㏥⫋ᚋ䜒⢭ຊⓗ䛻◊✲άື䛻ᦠ䜟䛳䛶䛔䜛䚹ᑓ㛛ศ㔝䛿㎰ᴗ⤒῭Ꮫ䞉ᅜ㝿ᆅᇦ㛤ⓎᏛ䚸⌧ᅾ᪥ᮏ㎰ᴗᕷሙᏛ఍఍㛗䚸᪥ᮏ㎰ᴗ⤒῭Ꮫ఍๪఍㛗䚸᪥ᮏᅜ㝿ᆅᇦ㛤ⓎᏛ఍๪఍㛗䚹Academic career
Professor Hiroyuki Takeya received Ph.D. from Graduate School of Agriculture, Nagoya University, in
1976.

Professional career
Professor Hiroyuki Takeya was a research fellow of Japan Society for the Promotion of Science in 1973.
In October of the same year, he started to work for School of Agriculture, Nagoya University, as AssistantProfessor in agricultural economics. He studied developing processes of Japanese farming andmechanisms for capacity building of farmers, and on part-time farming related to development of Toyota
Automobile Industry, etc. He was promoted to Associate Professor in 1989 and to Professor in 1992,
School of Agriculture, Nagoya University, and Professor, Graduate School of Bioagricultural Sciences ofthe same university in 1999. Professor Takeya served as a council member of Nagoya University from1998 to 2000. He supervised more than 19 Japanese and international students for their doctoral thesis
since 1992. Professor Takeya assumed International Cooperation Center for Agricultural Education,
ICCAE, as Director from 1999 to 2007. Even after his compulsory retirement in 2009, Professor Takeya
has been actively working on his research fields and as an expert of policy making and evaluation for
central and local governments in Japan.

- 150 １５０

Socioeconomic Factors Needed for NERICA Dissemination in Kenya

Profile䝆䝵䝉䝣䞉䝙䝳䞊䝖䞁䞉O䞉䜸䜿䝏Joseph Newton O. Okech䜿䝙䜰ᅜ❧㎰ᴗ◊✲ᡤ䜻䝪䝇䝉䞁䝍䞊㻌 ♫఍⤒῭◊✲㒊㛗Head, Socio Economics Department
Kenya Agricultural Research Institute, Kibos Center, Kenya
Contact:

Kenya Agricultural Research Institute (KARI) – Kibos CenterBox 1490-40100, Kisumu, Kenya
Tel: + 254 57 722252683
E-mail: okechjno@ yahoo.com䜸䜿䝏Ặ䛿䚸1978 ᖺ䚸䜿䝙䜰ᅜ❧㎰ᴗ◊✲ᡤ䠄䝘䜲䝻䝡䠅䛻ᅡሙヨ㦂ᣦᑟ┘╩ᢏ⾡⿵బ䛸䛧䛶᥇⏝䛥䜜䛯䚹1984 ᖺྠ◊✲ᡤ䛻ᅾ⡠䛧䛴䛴䚸䜶䝆䝱䞊䝖䞁኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫ㒊䛻ධᏛ䚸1987 ᖺྠᏛ㒊䜢༞ᴗ䚸ྠᖺᅡሙ⟶⌮୺௵䛻᪼᱁䛧䚸ᅡሙヨ㦂䛾ᢏ⾡㠃䛸㈨※᭷ຠ฼⏝䛾㠃䛛䜙ᅡሙ⟶⌮㐠Ⴀ䜢ᢸᙜ䛧䛯䚹
1990 ᖺ䛻♫఍⤒῭Ꮫ◊✲ຓᡭ䛸䛺䜚䚸1992 ᖺ䚸䜿䝙䜰䛾୺せ✄సᆅᖏ䛻䛒䜛ྠ◊✲ᡤ䜻䝪䝇ヨ㦂ሙ䛻␗ື䛧䚸ኳỈ᮲௳ୗ䛻䛚䛡䜛✄స㐺ᛂ◊✲䛾୺௵䛸䛧䛶 1996 ᖺ䜎䛷ᣦᑟ┘╩䛻ᙜ䛯䛳䛯䚹1997 ᖺ䛛䜙 1999 ᖺ䜎䛷䚸䜼䝪䝇ヨ㦂ሙ䛾♫఍⤒῭Ꮫ◊✲䛻㛵䜟䜛❧᱌䞉ᐇ᪋䜢ᣦᑟ䛧䚸2000 ᖺ䛻䛿♫఍⤒῭Ꮫ◊✲㒊㛗䛻᪼᱁䛧䛯䚹䛣䛾㛫䚸1997 ᖺ䝻䞁䝗䞁኱Ꮫ኱Ꮫ㝔ಟኈㄢ⛬㎰ᴗ⤒῭Ꮫ䝁䞊䝇ධᏛ䚸
2002 ᖺྠ䝁䞊䝇䜢ಟ஢䛧䚸㎰ᴗ⤒῭Ꮫಟኈ䜢ᚓ䛶䛔䜛䚹2001 ᖺ䛛䜙⌧ᅾ䜎䛷䚸◊✲ᬑཬάື䛾⤫ᣓ⪅䛸䛧䛶䚸䜎䛯㎰ᴗᢏ⾡䞉᝟ሗᬑཬ䜲䝙䝅䜰䝏䝤䞉䝁䞊䝕䜱䝛䞊䝍䞊䛸䛧䛶ᢏ⾡ᬑཬ䛻ᦠ䜟䜚䚸⌧ᅾ䛻⮳䛳䛶䛔䜛䚹

Academic career
Mr. Joseph Newton O. Okech graduated from School of Agriculture, Egerton University of Kenya in
1987.

Professional career
Mr. Joseph Newton O. Okech joined KARI in 1978 as a technical assistant, before he pursuing his
degree at the School of agriculture of Egerton University in 1984. After his graduation he wassimultaneously promoted to a farm manager of KARI in 1987 where he ensured efficient resource
allocation through development of farm plan for research and revenue generation activities. He became
an officer in charge of on-farm rainfed rice trials in West Kenya in 1992; he then served as an assistantsocio economist in 1997. He was again promoted to a coordinator at Agricultural Technology andInformation Response Initiative (ATIRI) in 2001 and also worked in charge of research extension liaisons
during 2001 to 2006. He has collaborated with ICCAE staff as a research fellow for technology
dissemination research of NERICA in Kenya in 2006. Mr. Joseph Newton O. Okech is currently the headof Socio Economic Section in Kenya Agricultural Research Institute (KARI) Kibos Center where he ismainly facilitating priority setting for rice and cotton research and conducting impact assessment/adoption
studies on cotton and rice technologies on farmers’ fields.

- 151 １
５
１Why was the Green Revolution not Successful in Sub-Sahara Africa?: Sawah (Suiden) Hypothesis (1)䝃䝤䝃䝝䝷䜰䝣䝸䜹䛷䛿ఱᨾ⥳䛾㠉࿨䛾ᐇ⌧䛜㐜䜜䛯䛛䠛䠖Ỉ⏣௬ㄝ䠄䠍䠅
Why was the Green Revolution not Successful in Sub-Sahara Africa?:
Sawah (Suiden) Hypothesis (1)ⱝ᭶㻌 ฼அ㻌 㼀㼛㼟㼔㼕㼥㼡㼗㼕㻌㼃㼍㼗㼍㼠㼟㼡㼗㼕㻌㏆␥኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫ㒊ᩍᤵ
Professor, School of Agriculture, Kinki University

Abstract
The green revolution has yet to occur in SSA due to the lack of the necessary prerequisite
conditions. The lacking of the concept and appropriate technical term, therefore lacking
appropriate research and the development of “sawah” technology made confusion in the researchand development of rice cultivation in SSA. Contrary to Asian farmers’ fields, farmers’ fields in
SSA, and specifically their farming technologies, are not ready to accept irrigation, fertilizer andhigh yielding varieties (HYV). Although research and development on irrigation, fertilizers and
HYV has been discussed for the last thirty years, the discussions have not touched on whether theprerequisite conditions are lacking in SSA. The concept and technologies of sawah is such an
example. The term “sawah” refers to leveled and bunded rice fields with inlet and outlet
connecting irrigation and drainage. The term originates from Malayo-Indonesian. The English
term, Paddy or Paddi, also originates from the Malayo-Indonesian term, Padi, which means rice
plant. In order to avoid confusion between upland paddy fields and man-made irrigated rice
growing environment, lowland paddy fields, the author proposes to use the term “sawah” in West
Africa.
Simply speaking, the basic infrastructures for green revolutions are lacking. The potential of
sawah based rice farming is enormous in SSA, especially in West Africa. Ten to twenty million haof sawah can produce additional food for more than 300 million people in future. The sawah based
rice farming can overcome both low soil fertility and scarce water resources through theenhancement of the geological fertilization process, conserving water resources, and the highperformance multi-functionality of the sawah type wetlands. Irrigation without farmers’ sawah
farming technologies has proved inefficient or even damaging because of accelerated erosion andwaste of water resources. In the absence of water control, fertilizers cannot be used efficiently.
Consequently, the high yielding varieties perform poorly and soil fertility cannot be sustained
hence green revolution cannot take place.
Although the upland was the major rice ecology 15 years ago, it seems now upland is not andwill not be the major rice production ecology in Sub Sahara, especially in West Africa. This is thevery promising change to complete the green revolution finally in this region. Between 1984 and1999/2003, annual paddy production dramatically increased from 3.4 to 7.7 million tones in West
Africa. Major increases were from the expansion and yield increases of rainfed lowland, mainly
inland valley, i.e. 0.75 to 3.4 million tones of annual paddy production during the same period.
Expansion and the yield increase of irrigated lowland were the second contributors. From 1984 to
1999/2003, annual paddy production from irrigated ecologies has increased from 0.64 to 1.9
million tones. Only very minor contributions were from the rainfed upland, i.e. 1.5 million tonesof paddy in 1.5 to 1.8 million tones of paddy during the same period.
These trends clearly show natural resource management technology, especially through the
improvement of water control in lowland, especially rainfed lowland, also played a major role inincreasing rice production last 15 years. If this good intensification trend will be enhanced
properly, the green revolution will be realized in this region within next 10-20 years.

- 153 １
５
３

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Materialization of African Rice Green Revolution by Sawah Eco-technology:
Concept Paper of New Sawah Project, 2007-2011㼀㼛㼟㼔㼕㼥㼡㼗㼕㻌㼃㻭㻷㻭㼀㻿㼁㻷㻵㻖㻘㻌㻹㼛㼞㼛㻌㻹㻚㻌㻮㼁㻾㻵㻖㻖㻌㼍㼚㼐㻌㻻㼘㼍㼐㼕㼙㼑㼖㼕㻌㻵㻚㻌㻻㻸㻭㻰㻱㻸㻱㻖㻖㻖㻌* Faculty of Agriculture, Kinki University* * Soil Research Institute, Kumasi, GHANA* * * Department of Agricultural Extension and Rural Development, University of Ibadan

Abstract
Even 40 years after the success in tropical
Asia and Latin America, the green revolution is
yet to be realized in Sub Sahara Africa (SSA).
The materialization of rice green revolution is the
major target of the millennium development goalsof the United Nations. Although the breeding ofhigh yielding varieties (HYV) by biotechnology
was the core technology in Asian and Latin
American green revolution and which the African
Rice Center, WARDA, has innovated in NERICA
technologies, the successful path to the green
revolution in SSA is still unclear. The paper
discussed the Sawah hypothesis (I) and (II). The
first Sawah hypothesis (I) explains that the central
to the realization of the rice green revolution in
SSA is eco-technologies, which can improve
farmers rice growing environment, such as
lowland sawah eco-technologies. The second
Sawah hypothesis (II) explains that sustainable
rice productivity of lowland sawah is more than
10times than that of upland rice fields, if
appropriate lowlands are selected, developed andmanaged. Contrary to Asian farmers’ fields, themajority of farmers’ rice fields in SSA are notready to accept the three basic components of thegreen revolution technologies, i.e., (1) irrigation
for water supply, (2) fertilizer for soil nutrient
supply, and (3) high yielding varieties (HYV).
Although researchers have worked seriously on
the effect of irrigation, fertilizers and HYV forthe last forty years, the researchers have nottouched on whether the prerequisite conditions
which can accommodate the three basic
components of the green revolution exist or not in
SSA. The concept and technologies of Sawah issuch an example. The term sawah refers toleveled, bunded, and puddled rice field with water
inlet and outlet to control water and manage soil
fertility, which may be connecting irrigation anddrainage facilities including sawah to sawah
irrigation and drainage. The term originatesfrom Malayo-Indonesian.
The English andFrench terms, Paddy or Paddi, also originatedfrom the Malyo- Indonesian term, Padi, whichmeans rice plant. In order to avoid confusion
between upland paddy fields and man-madeleveled, bunded and puddled rice fields, i.e.,
typically irrigated rice ecology, which isinappropriately used as lowland paddy fields, theauthors propose to use the term “Sawah” in SSA.
Simply speaking the basic infrastructures for thegreen revolution are lacking in the farmers’ fieldsof SSA. Irrigation without farmers’ sawah
farming technologies has proved inefficient oreven damaging because of accelerated erosion
and waste of water resources in SSA. In theabsence of water control, fertilizers cannot be
used efficiently.
Consequently, the highyielding varieties perform poorly and soil fertility
cannot be sustained, hence the green revolution
can not be achieved. The potential of Sawah
based rice farming is enormous in SSA,
especially in West Africa. Ten to twenty million
ha of sawah can produce additional food for morethan 300 million people in future. The sawahbased rice farming can overcome both low soil
fertility and scarce water resources through theenhancement of multi-functionality of sawah typewetlands as well as geological fertilization
processes in watersheds. The sawah systems
can even enhance the restoration of degradedwatershed through the sustainable expansion ofafforestation to form a watershed agro-forestry,
which will combat global warming in future.

Introduction
The green revolution has yet taken place inWest Africa and Sub Sahara Africa(SSA)(FAOSTAT 2006, Evenson and Gollin2003). Although food crops are very diverse,
per capita total production of major food crops
has been stagnating between140-170kg in SSA as
seen in Table 1. In tropical Asia, because of the- 154 １
５
４

Why was the Green Revolution not Successful in Sub-Sahara Africa?: Sawah (Suiden) Hypothesis (1)green revolution, the figures increased from205kg in 1961-1965 more than 280kg in
1996-2000 (Table 1). This is the foundation ofhigh difference of economic growth between SSA
and Asia at present. Now Asia is a global centerof economic growth thanks to the green
revolution that started in 1970s.
Due to high water content (60-70%) of root
and tuber crops, such as yam and cassava, theenergy per kg is one third of cereals, such as rice,wheat and maize. In addition, the protein andminerals content of yam and cassava are only one
fourth to one fourteenth in comparison withcereals. Therefore, the production data of FAO
are shown after division by the factor of 8 forcassava and 5 for yam. These factors of 8 or 5 are

Table 1

only tentative, which were used only for reach to
the estimation of reasonable cereals’ equivalents
for comparison in the Table 1 (FAOSTAT 2006,
Kiple and Ornelas 2000, Sanchez 1976). Also
the following historical observation in Asia adds
to the argument. Root and tuber based food hadchanged to cereals based food, such as rice andwheat. In future, cereals, especially rice, will be
more important than now in SSA (FAOSTAT2006). Although the cereals’ equivalents aretentative values, the trend data show thedifference of Asia and SSA during 1960-2003.
As shown in (Fig. 7) later, mean rice yield has
increased from 1.8 t/ha to 4.0 t/ha in Asia, but theyield has stagnated between 1.2 to 1.5 t/ha in SSA
during 1960 - 2005.

Five years’ means of major cereals’ production and importation per person last 40
years in Asia and Sub-Sahara Africa (FAO STAT 2006).
Note: Because of water content of Cassava and Yam are high (60-70%) and low mineral & protein content
in comparison with the other cereals, the production data of FAO were divided by 8 for Cassava and5 for Yam to estimate cereals equivalent (Sanchez 1976, Kiple and Ornelas 2000).

Africa - South of Sahara: Food Production (kg/person)
Year
Rice, Paddy
Wheat
Maize
Cassava (1/8)
Yams (1/5)
Sorghum
MilletPaddy
Rice-Import
Wheat-Import
Total*

1961-1965 1966-1970 1971-1975 1976-1980 1981-1985 1986-1990 1991-1995 1996-2000 2001-2003
16.3
17.5
18.2
17.6
17.3
19.2
19.2
19.9
18.1
8.1
8.4
7.7
6.8
6.7
6.8
6.2
6.3
6.2
42.5
44.3
45.0
43.4
40.3
50.6
46.6
46.2
42.2
18.8
18.6
18.4
18.1
17.6
18.0
20.2
19.5
19.7
7.8
10.8
8.8
6.6
5.6
6.6
11.5
11.9
11.6
44.7
38.3
34.0
31.5
31.1
30.8
31.2
31.3
31.9
31.7
29.3
27.8
23.3
21.2
23.0
22.1
22.3
21.8
3.8
3.8
4.3
7.7
10.3
8.8
9.0
8.3
9.9
4.5
6.0
7.4
9.7
11.8
10.2
11.2
13.1
15.7
169.8
167.2
159.9
147.4
139.5
154.9
157.1
157.3
151.6

Asia: Food Production (kg/person)
Year
Rice, Paddy
Wheat
Maize
Cassava (1/8)
Yams (1/5)
Sorghum
MilletPaddy
Rice-Import
Wheat-Import
Total*

1961-1965 1966-1970 1971-1975 1976-1980 1981-1985 1986-1990 1991-1995 1996-2000 2001-2003
124.5
131.8
134.2
137.4
148.8
149.8
147.1
149.8
141.1
41.6
44.2
49.6
57.6
67.0
70.6
79.0
78.4
72.2
19.6
23.9
26.1
31.3
34.0
38.0
41.8
45.0
43.3
1.4
1.4
1.5
2.1
2.2
2.1
1.9
1.7
1.8
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
0.0
9.6
9.7
8.3
8.2
7.1
5.9
5.0
3.8
3.0
8.6
9.5
7.8
6.6
6.3
4.9
4.2
3.8
3.6
3.7
3.4
3.1
3.0
2.4
2.2
2.3
3.9
3.7
10.7
11.4
11.7
12.0
13.7
14.6
15.0
13.5
11.7
205.3
220.4
227.6
243.1
265.4
271.4
279.0
282.5
265.3

West Africa: Food Production (kg/person)
Year
1961-1965 1966-1970 1971-1975 1976-1980 1981-1985 1986-1990 1991-1995 1996-2000 2001-2003
Rice, Paddy
18.4
21.1
21.9
22.1
23.8
27.4
29.3
31.4
28.2
Wheat
0.3
0.3
0.2
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.3
0.4
0.3
Maize
27.1
27.2
23.5
18.6
21.9
42.6
48.7
41.4
38.6
Cassava (1/8)
16.6
17.3
16.4
16.7
14.8
16.8
25.3
25.3
24.7
Yams (1/5)
17.8
25.0
20.5
15.2
12.8
15.4
27.4
28.3
27.6
Sorghum
70.6
56.7
47.0
40.3
42.1
46.5
48.6
47.9
47.2
Millet
59.8
54.0
52.7
42.4
41.6
48.0
45.7
45.4
44.6
Paddy
Rice-Import
5.3
5.8
6.2
13.2
17.4
15.3
16.7
15.7
19.1
Wheat-Import
4.0
5.8
8.0
13.3
14.3
9.6
11.4
13.8
16.7
Total*
210.7
201.6
182.2
155.5
157.3
197.3
225.3
220.1
211.3
Total*: Excluding the imports of paddy rice and wheat.

- 155 １５
５

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

paddy production from irrigated ecologies
increased from 0.64 to 1.9 million tones during
the same period through the expansion of areafrom 0.23 to 0.56 million ha and yield increased
from 2.8 to 3.4 t/ha.
Only very minor
contributions came from the upland rice ecology,i.e., the increase of paddy production was from
1.5 to 1.8 million tones and the increase of thecultivated area from 1.5 to 1.8 million ha, but noyield increased during the same period.
Although the NERICA technology was released,
the upland rice strategy of WARDA for
1993-2003 (WARDA 1988) did not contribute to
the rice production during the same period inWest Africa.
These trends clearly show that the
improvement of the natural resource management
technology, especially through the improvementof water control in rainfed lowland played amajor role in increasing rice production during
last 15 years. If this trend is supported byadapting the sawah eco-technology strategy
proposed in this paper, the green revolution will
be realized in this region by 2015.

As seen in Table 1, West Africa is a coreregion of SSA in terms of the rice production andimportation as well as rice consumption.
Therefore the authors discussed mainly West
Africa in this strategic paper.
As shown in Table 2, although upland was the
major rice ecology 15 years ago, it is no more thelargest rice production ecology in West Africa
now.
If this trend continues, upland riceproduction ecology will be very small in SSA
especially in West Africa in the near future (Table
2: The data were compiled from FAOSTAT 2006,
WARDA 1988, 2002, and 2004, JICA 2003).
This is however very promising change to realize
the green revolution finally in West Africa and
SSA. Between 1984 and 1999/2003, annual
paddy production increased dramatically from 3.4
to 7.7 million tones in West Africa. Major
increases were from the rainfed lowland riceecology, mainly inland valley, which expanded
the area from 0.53 to 1.8 million ha and yield
increased from 1.4 to 2.0 t/ha. Thus, the annual
paddy production increased from 0.75 to 3.4
million tones during the same period. Irrigatedlowland was the second contributor. The annual

Table 2 Estimation of rice production trends by rice ecology in West Africa during
1984-1999/2003 and 2015.
Estimation by the author(JICA 2003, WARDA 1988, 2002, 2004, FAOSTAT 2006)
Area(million ha)

Production(million ton/y)Yield(t/ha)

1984

1999/03

2015

1984

1999/03

2015

1984

1999/032015

Upland

1.5

1.8

2.0

1.5

1.8

2.0

1.0

1.0

1.0

Contribution (%)

57%

40%

30%

42%

23%

13%

Rainfed lowland

0.53

1.8

3.0

0.75

3.4

7.0

1.4

2.0

2.4

Irrigated lowland

0.23

0.56

0.80

0.64

1.9

3.0

2.8

3.4

3.8

Total

2.6

4.7

6.0

3.4

7.7

14

1.3

1.6

2.4

Table 3

No yield increase

Major soil distributions in the three tropics based on the Soil Taxnomy(Hirose and Wakatsuki 2002)

Total
Entisol Spodosol Histosol Ultisol
Inceptisol Andisol Oxisol Psamment Alfisol
Mollisol Vertisol Aridisol(excluding
Immature
Strongly
Volcanic
Eutrohpic,
Sandy,
Peat
Young
Aging, Q uartz
Grasslands, Black,Dry,
no-soil
Soil Characterristics parent
weathered,ash,lowleaching wetland
vitalityleaching leaching
dry season semi-arid desert
surface)materials
acid
fertileactivity
Toropical Africa
50
3
2
190
240
5
440
340
320
4
100
810
2,504
Toropical America
90
0.5
5
330
130
90
660
20
120
15
20
50
1,531
Toropical Asia
250
3
22
300
200
50
tr
tr
80
tr
100
10
1,015
Total tropics
620
7
30
820
570
145
1,100
360
520
19
220
890
5,050
(million ha)
Total (ratio in %)
11.7
0.1
0.6
15.5
10.8
2.7
20.8
6.8
9.8
0.4
4.2
16.6
100
Japan (ratio in %)
4
3.5
1.0
2.5
58
16
0
tr
tr
0
0
0
100

- 156 １
５
６Why was the Green Revolution not Successful in Sub-Sahara Africa?: Sawah (Suiden) Hypothesis (1)Soil distribution characteristics of SSA andsoil fertility of West African lowland incomparison with that of Tropical Asia
(Wakatsuki and Masunaga 2005)
Table 3 shows the estimated area of soil orderin three major tropical zones in the world, i.e.,
tropical Asia, Africa, and America (Sanchez 1976,
Kyuma 2004, Eswaran et al 1992 and 1997, Soil
Survey Staff 1998, 1999, Hirose and Wakatsuki
2002). The combined area of the nutrients
depleted Oxisols and Psamments as well as water
deficient Aridisols accounts for 64% of SSA. In
tropical Asia, although acid Ultisols arewidespread, since the geology is much younger,
Oxisols, Psamments and Aridisols are minor
distribution.
These soils are unsuitable for
agriculture. In tropical America, Oxisols haveDuring 1986 to 2007, the senior author
conducted various surveys on the West African
rice based farming systems in flood plains, inland
valleys and various uplands.
Those soils,
mainly lowlands, were collected from most West
African countries, including Senegal, Guinea,
Sierra Leone, Liberia, Cote d’Ivoire, Mali,
Burkina Faso, Ghana, Togo, Benin, Niger,
Nigeria, and Cameroon as well as the Dem. Rep.
of the Congo in central Africa. Soil fertility
characteristics were evaluated and their fertility
were compared with that of soils in tropical Asia
and Japan. The results were summarized inTable 4 (Wakatsuki et al 1998, Issaka et al. 1997,
Buri et al. 1999 and 2000, Kawaguchi andKyuma 1977, Hirose and Wakatsuki 2002).

wide distribution, 43%, but few distributions ofAridisols and Psammnets.
Among the soilorders in the tropics, Andisols on upland andInceptisols as well as Entisols in lowland havegood moisture and fertility in general. Whileintensive and relatively sustainable farming
systems are practiced on Andisol areas in all of
the three tropical zones, the Inceptisols andEntisols in lowlands are not very much used inboth tropical Africa and America. In tropicalAsia, however, the lowland Inceptisols andEntisols are utilized more intensively for sawahbased rice production systems.
The sawah
systems, total area of about 100 million ha, areproducing rice food for more than two billion
people in sustainable basis (Greenland 1997,
Kyuma 2004).
Total carbon and nitrogen content were low bothfor West Africa and tropical Asia. The meanvalues of available phosphorous and pH suggestthat the phosphorous status of West Africa is very
critical.
Base status such as exchangeablecalcium and potassium and effective cationexchange capacity were also very low incomparison with the tropical Asia. In addition,some micronutrients, such as sulfur and zinc arealso generally very low and about 60-80% of
lowland soils, both inland valleys and flood
plains were in deficient level (Buri et al 2000).
Comparison of soil fertility data of tropical
America also revealed that the fertility of lowland
soils in West Africa was the lowest among thethree tropics (Hirose and Wakatsuki 2002).

Table 4 The mean values of fertility properties of inland valleys (IVS, about 200 sites) and flood
plains (FLP, about 70 sites) of West Africa in comparison with lowland topsoils of tropical
Asia (about 500 sites) and Japan (about 150 sites) (Hirose and Wakatsuki 2002)
Location

pH

Total
C (%)

Total
N (%)

Available
P (ppm)**Exchangeable Cations (cmol/kg)
Ca
K
Mg
eCEC

Sand
(%)

Clay
(%)

CEC
/Clay

IVS

5.3

1.3

0.11

9

1.9

0.3

0.9

4.2

60

17

25

FLP

5.4

1.1

0.10

7

5.6

0.5

2.7

10.3

48

29

36

T. Asia*

6.0

1.4

0.13

18

10.4

0.4

5.5

17.8

34

38

47

Japan*

5.4

3.3

0.29

57

9.3

0.4

2.8

12.9

49

21

61

*Kawaguchi and Kyuma 1977,** Bray 2- 157 １５
７International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

In high rainfall zones of West Africa such as
equatorial forest in Liberia and Sierra Leone,
Oxisols are widespread in upland areas. The
typical toposequence of inland valley soils near
Makeni in central Sierra Leone was Oxisols inflat upland, Oxisols/Ultisols in gentle slopes andInceptisols in valley bottom. The eCEC of the
topsoils were 1-5 cmol(+ ) /kg and exchange
acidity percentages were 10-90% throughout thetopesequnce (Smaling et al 1985 a and b, Hirose
and Wakatsuki 2002). The upland soils haveespecially low carbon and nitrogen contents, lessthan 1% and 0.1% respectively.
Available
phosphorus (Bray II) was also lower than that oflowland soils. Exchangeable bases are also
generally lower than those of soils in inland
valleys and flood plains. In Savannah zones,
such as Sudan and Guinea, although the uplandsoils are mainly Alfisols but the eCEC of thesesoils is also very low, normally less than 5
Cmol(+ )/Kg.
Low activity clay soils are
predominant.
In addition to the poor soil
fertility, the recent shortage of rainfall also further
makes it difficult to conduct sustainable upland
rice cultivation.
Although organic matter management throughagroforestry and cover crop systems are possible
options to sustain soil fertility (Tian et al 2001),
in order to overcome such difficulties and for
effective and sustainable crop production in SSA,
new farming systems that can restore and enrichthese poor soils must be developed. In terms ofsustainability, re-evaluation of traditional farming
technology is important (Barrera-Bassols andZinck, 2000). However, for the sustainable
increase to cope with recent population expansion,
only re-evaluation of traditional farming is notenough (Hirose and Wakatsuki 2002).
As
discussed in this paper, the new concept of
ecological engineering technology is necessary.
The African adaptive lowland sawah-based
farming with adjunct small-scale irrigation
scheme for the integrated watershed management
will be the most promising strategy to increasesustainable and intensive food production and at
the same time to restore the degraded watersheds
in SSA.

Concept of sawah eco-technology
The concept and the term “sawah” refers to
man-made improved rice fields with demarcated,
leveled, bunded and puddled rice fields withwater inlet and water outlet, which, if possible,
can be connecting various irrigation facilities,
such as irrigation canals, pond, spring, pump,water harvesting, and flooded sawah, etc(Fig.1-6). Just sawah to sawah irrigation as wellas drainage are possible.
Rainfed sawahs
without any irrigation facilities are also far better
than rainfed fields for rice growth and for ricegreen revolution because of the improvement ofwater and soil management. Drainage facilities
are also useful in over flooded area. The term“sawah” originates from Malayo-Indonesian.
The English and French terms, Paddy or Paddi,
also originated from the Malayo-Indonesian term,
Padi, which means rice plant. In order to avoid
confusion between upland paddy fields andman-made leveled, bunded and puddle rice fields,
i.e., typically irrigated rice growing environment,
which is often un-appropriately used as lowland
paddy fields, the authors propose to use the term
“Sawah” in SSA (Wakatsuki et al 1998).
For the sustainable increase of rice yield andproduction, farmers have to control water on rice
fields. If the degree of water control improves,sustainable rice yields will increase (Hiose andWakatsuki 2002, Table 5 by Ofori et al 2005).
In order to control water, sawah system has to be
developed, improved and managed (Fig. 1).
Taiwan team has played a pioneering role intechnical cooperation for the introduction of thesawah based rice cultivation in Africa during
1965 to 1975 (Hsieh 2003). However as thistechnical cooperation continued only for some 10
years because of political reason, confusion andstagnation occurred on the technology transfer ofthe sawah based rice framings in the 1980s(Buddenhagen and Persley 1978 and IITA
1989/1990).

- 158 １
５
８Why was the Green Revolution not Successful in Sub-Sahara Africa?: Sawah (Suiden) Hypothesis (1)

R
Water
Inlet

area
A(m2)
PuddledLeveledBundedWater
OutletBundedQ 1
Q 2

Q 1: Surface water inflow
Q 2: Surface water outflow
P1: Water percolation input
P2: Water percolation output
Pp: Water percolation downward output
Et: Evapotranspiration, R: Rainfall

Et

P2
Drainage
CannelPp

P1

Irrigation
canal

Irrigation
canalPossible layout of SAWAH on typical inland valley 10-100m
bottom slope in West Africa.
River

Fig. 1

0.1-2m100-1000+ m

What is “Sawah”?
“Sawah” is leveled, bunded and puddled rice field with
inlets and outlets to control water.

Table 5 Mean gain yield of 23 rice cultivars in lowland ecologies
at low (LIL) and high input levels (HIL), Ashanti, Ghana (Ofori et al 2005)

Entry No. Cultivar

ECOTECHNOLOGICAL YIELD IMPROVEMENT
Rainfed sawah
Upland like fields

Irrigated Sawah
HIL

LIL

HIL

BIOTECHNOLOGICAL IMPROVEMENT(t/ha)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

WAB
EMOK
PSBRC34PSBRC54PSBRC66
BOAK189
WITA 8Tox3108
IR5558
IR58088IR54742C123CUCT9737CT8003
CT9737-P
WITA1
WITA3
WITA4
WITA6
WITA7
WITA9
WITA12
GK88

4.6
4.0
7.7
8.0
5.7
7.0
7.8
7.1
7.9
7.7
7.7
6.9
6.5
7.3
8.2
7.6
7.6
8.0
8.0
7.3
7.6
7.6
7.5

LIL

HIL

(t/ha)

2.8
2.9
3.0
3.8
3.8
3.7
4.4
4.0
3.8
3.7
4.0
4.2
4.0
3.8
4.3
3.3
4.1
3.7
4.0
3.8
4.5
3.8
3.5

2.9
2.8
3.5
3.7
3.3
3.8
4.2
4.1
4.0
4.0
4.3
4.1
4.0
3.8
4.0
3.6
3.5
4.1
3.5
3.7
4.4
4.0
3.8

LIL
(t/ha)

1.6
1.3
2.1
2.1
2.0
2.0
2.1
2.3
2.0
1.8
2.2
1.9
1.7
1.7
1.8
1.8
2.0
2.1
2.3
2.2
2.8
1.9
2.0

2.1
1.4
2.0
1.7
1.8
1.4
1.8
2.3
1.8
1.4
1.9
2.0
1.9
2.0
1.2
0.9
1.3
1.5
1.4
2.0
2.0
1.8
1.8

0.6
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.5
0.6
0.5
0.3
0.4
0.4
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.3
0.5
0.3
0.3
0.4
0.6
0.4
0.5

Mean (n=23)

7.2

3.8

3.8

2.0

1.7

0.4

Range
SD

(4.0-8.2)
1.51(2.8-4.4)
0.81(2.8-4.5)
0.81(1.3-2.8)
0.45(0.9-2.3)
0.44(0.3-0.6)
0.12

Because of various costs of green revolution technology, the yields must be higher
than 4 t/ha for sustainably adopting green revolution technologies.

- 159 １５
９

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

It is now very difficult to build new irrigation
project through the conventional ways of Official
Development Assistance (ODA) because of thehigh cost of irrigation and its apparent low returnin SSA. Especially, the large-scale irrigation
projects are very costly. Even in the small
irrigation schemes, the construction cost becomescomparable to large schemes as far as theirdevelopment depends mainly on engineering
works by construction companies. Although thetotal sale of produce is between 1,000 –2,000
dollars per ha, the running cost including
maintenance of such systems, machinery for
operation, agrochemicals become very high.
Due to the high construction cost, the economic
return has been negligible or rather negative for along period of time, 20-30 years.
However, the most impressive achievements
observed by the senior author in the past 15 years
were that inland valley development for
improving water control of the rice-growing
environment through bunding and leveling, which
are ongoing in West Africa despite the major
negligence of the research in this area and scarce
official funding (Table 2). These are based
mainly on farmers’ self-support efforts.
Decreasing trend of rainfall in recent years might
persuade farmers to shift partly from upland to
lowland. The senior author observed that there
were many upland rice fields around Bouake in
1987. In 2002, however, almost no upland rice
fields were observed around the Bouake area.
These lowland development activities arecalled “intensified lowland”, “partial water
control”,
just“lowlanddevelopment”,“amenagement” or “system du Chinois” after theactivities by Taiwan team” in some Francophone
SSA, or “contour bund system”. Although thequality of these systems is quite diverse, these are
all covered by the “sawah concept and sawah

In addition to the construction cost ofirrigation schemes, the management of theschemes has been a problem in SSA. Water use
efficiency was very low because of the confusion
between irrigation scheme and the sawah systems
in SSA. The irrigation schemes are constructed
and managed by government and/or communities,
but the water condition in each irrigated rice field,
i.e., sawah, has to be managed by each rice
farmers. Actually water use efficiency in thewhole irrigation schemes is dependent on the
management skill of sawah fields of each rice
farmer. The lack of eco-technologies of sawahin SSA, majority of irrigation schemes have neverbeen sustainable for the last four decades.
Therefore the official development of irrigation
schemes, large and small, by governments is veryslow.
technology and development” (Wakatsuki et al1998). Some rice farmers as well as some West
African and donor countries have realized theimportance of soil and water management,
especially the water management, through various
sawah based rice cultivation technologies are notdefined clearly (Figs. 1 and Table 2).
WARDA’s inland valley consortium (IVC) also
contributed to encourage these developments
partly. A USD$ 23 million inland valley ricedevelopment project (IVRDP, 2004-2009) isbased on the sawah approach in Ghana financedby African Development Bank, is a good example,
if it becomes successful (Wakatsuki et al 2001,
Hirose and Wakatsuki 2002, Ministry of Foodand Agriculture, Ghana, 2007 a and b). Massive
irrigation scheme by office du Niger in Mali has
been performing and now to reach the level ofgreen revolution, 4-5ton/ha, in their full schemeof 50,000ha in last ten years after thirty years ofvery poor performance during 1960-1990 (JICA
2003).

- 160 １６０Why was the Green Revolution not Successful in Sub-Sahara Africa?: Sawah (Suiden) Hypothesis (1)Rainfed Sawah

Fig. 3 Rice ecologies along upland-lowland continuum in West Africa(JICA 2003, WARDA 2004)

Upland leveling and bunding arelimited only to good soil

Lowland is the target for leveling and bunding(Sawah systems research and development).

Water table and water management continuum (WARDA 2004).

Fig. 4 Rice farmer’s field demarcation based on soil, water and topography, such as
sawah development, are the starting point for scientific observation,technology generation and application- 161 １
６
１International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8Uplandwater

Water harvestable lowland
[ W]

sawah

contour bund
Water tableand groundwater

flood prone
lowland[ F][ S]
spring irrigablesloped lowland

lowland but
upland ecology
[ L]
[ U]
typical irrigable
lowland

river
[ U]

Irrigation options: Sawah to sawah/ contour bund water harvesting, spring, dyke,
river, point, peripheral canal,interceptor canal, tank, pump,
Lowland sawah development priority[ S] > [ L] > [ F] > [ W] > [ U]Fig. 5Strategy for sawah and irrigation development.
Various sawah (bunded, leveled, puddled rice land) development withvarious irrigation options depending on the characteristics of valley bottom
diversity in each agro-ecological zone.

Sawah-Based Eco-Technology

Farmers’ Fields
Diverse and mixed-up environment.
No clear field demarcations.

Diverse but well characterized and demarcated fields,
which are prerequisite to improve rice environment,
especially for water control. Green revolution
technology of fertilizer, irrigation and HYV are useful.

APCDEFAFIZPCMVPGMDUGHIGKCDILMBNIBNPQ TBBbbAACIGHOLKJDBVRNJUAHGDNVAPCDEFAFTABFTHKGM
DUGHIaaGKCDILMGHOLNHabHGKJ
WANOPVCX IRSMBQ TBBAACIGHX L
KJDHGLPUYMIRNJUAHGDNVG
HOLKNPSDOPTYTBBAACIGHYLKJDIRNJH

AAA

BBB

NN
EEE

DD

CCC

FFF
J JJ

HHH

I III

MMM

LLL

KK
aa

pure variety A
pure variety B
pure variety C
pure variety D

Mixed farming systems,
Diverse crops,
Mixed-up varieties: A B C D E……
Fertilizer, Irrigation, HYV are not effective.
Therefore, the green revolution is not possible

Sawah-Based
Farming System

Fig. 6 Sawah Hypothesis (I) : Successful Integrated Genetic and Natural Resource
Management (IGNRM) needs classified and demarcated land eco-technology.

- 162 １
６
２Why was the Green Revolution not Successful in Sub-Sahara Africa?: Sawah (Suiden) Hypothesis (1)Balanced approach between biotechnology
and eco-technology
In order to strengthen these trend, the way for
rapid expansion of eco-technology based low costand self-support sawah fields have to beresearched and developed in the rainfed lowland,
especially in inland valleys (Wakatsuki et al 1998,
2001, Hirose and Wakatsuki 2002). SSA needs
eco-technologies that can improve farmers’ rice
fields similar to the biotechnologies that can
improve rice varieties (Fig. 2, Table 5 by Ofori etal 2005).
Table 5 clearly shows that
eco-technological improvement of farmers rice
fieldsare
criticalcomparedtothebiotechnological variety improvement in SSA.
The technologies of genetic improvement of rice
(variety) and the rice growing environment(sawah) must be researched and developed ingood balance for integrated genetic and natural
resources management (IGNRM) (Fig. 2 and Fig.
8). Because of the success story of the green
revolution by HYV in Asia and Latin America by
CG centers, our research activities have been too

much one-sided focusing on HYV only for thelast forty years in SSA.
Table
6summarizedthepossible
eco-technology options to improve rice yields incomparison with biotechnology options. The
table shows that sawah eco-technology can givewide range of the improvement of rice yield, rice
quality and ecological environment including
carbon sequestration (Darmawan et al 2006a andb) through the improvement of water shortage,
poor nutrient conditions, acidity, alkalinity, weed
control, pest and diseases control, and foodquality (Hirose and Wakatsuki 2002, Kyuma
2004).
Therefore, in addition to theimprovement of variety through biotechnology,
the improvement of rice growing environment
has to be done through eco-technology.
Balanced research and technology developmentof biotechnology and eco-technology is very
important.

Biotechnology

andEcotechnology

Rice variety

andRice with Sawah Systems

Water inWater out

Varieties could
solve the main
problems in Asia.
Is this also
true in SSA?

Fig. 2

Sawah is a man-made, improved rice-growing environment
with demarcated, bunded, leveled, and puddled fields forwater control. Sawah is a soil based eco-technology.
Because of diverse soil, geology, topography, hydrology,
climate, vegetation and socio-cultural conditions, thetechnologies for sawah development and management arevery diverse. Therefore we have to research and develop thetechnology to accommodate in diverse SSA ecology.

Rice (variety) and environment (Sawah) improvement.
Both bio- & eco-technologies must be developed in balance- 163 １
６
３

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Rice growing ecologies are extremely diversein West Africa and SSA (Fig.3, JICA 2003,
WARDA 2004). The appropriate bund layout,
bunding and leveling quality, and size and shapesof sawah as well as appropriate site selection are
different depending on the characteristics oftargeted inland valleys and on the targeting
farming systems. Because of obvious benefitsof geological fertilizations (Fig. 11) as describedlater, lowland is the priority target for sawah
development (Fig.4).
Water harvesting andvarious simple irrigation technologies have to be
integrated with the various sawah developments
in diverse characteristics of the valley bottoms(Fig.5). Small machinery, such as power tiller,
has to be examined to accelerate the sawah
development. Tropical Asian experiments incollaboration for sawah development and foranimal traction and power tiller operation forsawah based rice farming will be very useful(Fashola et al 2007 a and b, Hsieh 2003).

Sawah Hypothesis (I)For the Green Revolution
On December 26, 2004, the concept of and theterm “TSUNAMI” were lacking in the vocabularyof people in Indian Ocean locations such as
Sumatra, Indonesia, Sri Lanka, India andThailand.
This seriously exaggerated thetsunami disaster. The lack of the concept andappropriate technical term for improving andmanaging the rice growth environment, such as“sawah” creates confusion in the research andsustainable development of rice cultivation inWest Africa. As seen from the success of
publicity of NERICA by WARDA, a clear
concept and key technical term are very importantfor integrated genetic and natural resource
management (IGNRM). As discussed already,unlike in Asian rice farmers’ fields, Sub Sahara
African farmers’ fields, and therefore the farming
technologies, are not ready to accept various
IGNRM technologies, such as irrigation,
fertilizers, integrated pest management (IPM),
and high yielding varieties (HYV) (Fig. 6 and 7).
Rice farmers’ field demarcation based on
topography, hydrology and soil is the starting
point for scientific observation, technology
generation and application, including the green
revolution technologies (Fig.6). For efficientuses of fertilizers and irrigation water, rice

farmers’ fields have to be demarcated based on
topography, hydrology and soils (Fig. 5 and 6).
Although there have been discussions on
researches and developments on irrigation,
fertilizers and HYV for the last forty years, thediscussions have not touched on whether theprerequisite conditions are lacking in SSA (Fig.6
and 7). The concept and technologies of Sawah
is such an example. Simply speaking, the basic
infrastructures for the green revolution, such as
sawah, are lacking in SSA (Fig. 1, 2, 6, and 7).
Irrigation without farmers’ sawah farming
technologies has proved inefficient or evendamaging because of accelerated erosion andwaste of water resources. In the absence ofwater control, fertilizers cannot be usedefficiently. Consequently, the high yielding
varieties perform poorly and soil fertility cannot
be sustained hence the green revolution cannot
take place. These are the Sawah hypothesis (I).
As shown in Fig.7, the majority of Asian rice
farmers’ fields were already quality sawah fields
in 1960s when the green revolution technologies
were introduced. Therefore the three major
components of the green revolution technologies
were quickly adapted. However, the majority ofrice farmers’ fields of SSA are lacking suchsawah fields, therefore the three green revolution
technologies have not been effective for the last
forty years.
The HYVs have never been
performed successfully without sawah fields.
Irrigation and other agronomic technologies also
never performed well without sawah fields. But
if the sawah eco-technolgy is adapted to themajority of rice farmers in SSA, the green
revolution will be realized quickly as in the caseof Asia. Contrary to Asian farmers’ fields, thefarmers’ rice fields in SSA are not ready to accept
the three basic components of the green
revolution technologies, i.e., (1) irrigation forwater supply, (2) fertilizer for soil nutrient supply,and (3) high yielding varieties (HYV).
As described as “African Statistical Error” inthe yield trend of Sub Sahara Africa during
1960-2005 in Fig. 7, agricultural statistics arealso not so reliable in SSA. There are manyreasons, but lack of sawah as demarcated rice
fields makes it difficult to estimate the yield too.
Without reliable statistical data, appropriate ricedevelopment policy can not be established.

- 164 １
６
４Why was the Green Revolution not Successful in Sub-Sahara Africa?: Sawah (Suiden) Hypothesis (1)The sawah system development andmanagement are the technologies that should betransferred to farmers. Since bunding, levelingand puddling need very hard, skilled and careful
works as well as obvious additional benefits ofgeological fertilization, rainfed lowland will be
the primary target for sawah development (Fig. 4
and 11). The ecology of the majority of rice
farmers’ fields is extremely diverse in naturally
and farming systematically (Fig. 3), therefore
even the good quality seeds cannot be evaluatedproperly without sawah systems (Fig.6). Sawah
is also a means by which such ecologicallydiversified rice fields bringing into relatively
homogenous and classified fields to evaluate
appropriate variety. The successful IGNRM
needs classified demarcated lands such as sawahs.
The technology of rice variety improvement anddissemination has a clear concept and target suchas high yield, pest, draught and poor nutrient
tolerant, and high nutritive and quality varieties.
The remarkable achievement of the breeding
program at WARDA is clear. However there
were no such clear concepts and targets in the
researches of natural resource management inWest Africa for the last 20 years.
The missing link for the green revolution is asawah concept and technology, targeting the
expansion of high quality but with low cost. Ifsawah systems are successfully introduced tofarmers’ rice fields, the integrated genetic andnatural resources management (IGNRM)
technology generations to deal with water, soil,
and fertilizer management, low P availability
problem, weed and striga management, IPM,
control of CH4 emission and carbon sequestration,
animal traction and small machinery operation,
fish and rice, vegetable after rice, and so on, will
have clear target fields to apply and will therefore
be accelerated (Fig.7 and 8).
Long term
experiments on the effect of cropping system
investigations such as legume, biological nitrogen
fertilizer (BNF) and organic manure will bepossible. Iron toxicity has been often cited inWest Africa that can be tackled only properly insawah based IGNRM. Some pest and diseasesuch as African rice gall midge (AfRGM) andrice yellow mottle virus (RYMV) problems may
even be partly mitigated through enhancing thehealthy growth of rice through the sawah typeeco-technology.
Water saving aerobic ricecultivation and Systems Rice Intensification (SRI)

methods become only possible on sawah fields(Fig. 6 and 8).

African lowlands characterization incomparison with that of Asian lowlands inwatersheds
Because of diversity in soils, hydrology,
climate, vegetation, topography, and geology as
well as socio economic, cultural and historicalconditions, the technologies for sawah
development and management must fit suchdiverse conditions.
This is an importantresearch and development target for sustainable
rice production (Fig. 4-8). There is informationon the potential area of lowland sawah
development, such as 330,000 ha in Benin,
230,000 ha in Burkina Faso, 200,000 ha in Togo,
one million ha in Ghana, 20 million ha in whole
SSA (Hirose and Wakatsuki 2002) and so on.
This area estimation is, however, still at the
preliminary stage.
Details survey andcharacterization targeting sawah type lowland
development are necessary (Table 7, Fig. 3-5).
As shown in Table 7, the lowland area in SSA
is enormous (Windmaijer and Andriesse 1993),
but because of characteristics of naturalenvironment, particularly scarce water resources,
the potential area for sustainable sawah
development cannot cover all the lowland of SSA.
Lowland soil formation in SSA is much smaller
than in tropical Asia (Fig 9 by Walling 1983,
Wakatsuki 2002).
This will be a basic
ecological limiting factor to develop sawah
systems in SSA. One of the reasons why theecology of inland valleys in West Africa is sodiverse (Jamin and Windmeijer 1995) can be
explained partly from this (Fig.3, 5 and 9).
Inland valleys have various micro-topographies
as shown in Fig. 5, of which spring irrigablesloped land and typical irrigable lowland that canbe easily irrigated using pump, simple weir anddyke have the highest priority for sawah
development in SSA.
The relative area
distribution of these kinds of lowlands in various
inland valleys is yet to be determined. Floodprone areas need the control measures. Many
areas of inland valley bottoms that have uplandhydrology have the lowest priority for sawah
development. However, upland NERICA may
fit into such upland-like ecology in lowland.
Water harvestable lowland along the foot slopes- 165 １６
５

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

can be developed as contour-bunded sawah
systems with partially water controllable rice
fields as seen in northern Ghana and Burkina
Faso. The low cost technology to develop thesesystems has to be researched based on the fieldtrials-and-errors approach.
The lowland
demarcation and area estimation can be done withhelp of geographical information system (GIS)
technology.
Asian region has about 60-75% of global
monsoon rainfall, while SSA has about 10-15%,
which is about one fifth of Asia (Trenberth et al
2000, Q ian et al 2001, Levinson 2004). Basedon this amount of water cycling in the monsoon
climate in comparison with Asia where it has
about 100 million ha of irrigated sawah, the total
potential irrigated sawah may be about 20 million
ha in SSA (Table 7). Immediate target will be
10 million ha in SSA by 2050 (Fig. 7).
However, more appropriate estimation has to beresearched in detail coupled with realdevelopment through field trials-and-errors
approach in each agro-ecology.

Historical and geographical consideration
for sawah development
Undoubtedly natural environmental conditions,such as hot temperature and enough water during
rice growing season and lowland soil
sedimentation are the important factors forsustainable development of sawah system. As
seen in Fig. 9 (Walling 1983), soil erosion andhence lowland soil formation in West Africa arevery low in comparison with Asian watersheds.
High rates of soil erosion and lowland sawah soil
formation can be compensated by high rate of soil
formation in Asia because of active geologicalformation and ample monsoon rainfall (Hirose
and Wakatsuki 2002). Paradoxically, extreme
diversity of lowland in West Africa (Fig. 5) may
relate to the low rate of soil erosion and weaklowland soil formation.
As shown in Fig. 10, before the green
revolution, there were long continued efforts to
expand lowland sawah systems in the history ofJapanese rice cultivation during the 6th to 20th
centuries. The Fig.10 shows the trends of rice
yields, sawah area, and population of historicalpath in Japan in comparison with rice yields inmajor Asian and African countries. Because of

farmers’ sawah fields had been developed andsawah-based eco-technology was traditional,
Japan’s green revolution happened immediately
after the introduction of Euro-American’s
fertilizer technology at the end of the 19th century.
The green revolution in turn encouraged the rapid
expansion of sawah area more than one million hawithin 50 years when population was less than 60
million (Fig.10). Although after the World War
II, because of the expansion of the economy,
industrialization, and urbanization, the sawah area
had decreased rapidly, more than 1.5 million hawithin 40 years, 1960 to 2000. The Japanese
population is estimated to decrease almost 50%
during 21st century. These are the crises incurrent Japan and near future. On the other hand,
SSA and the world are expecting rapid population
explosion during the 21st century, the green
revolution and the expansion of sawah area arenecessary to cope with the forthcoming peak
population.
Apart from the above natural geographicalreasons, the background of the cause of lack of
the prerequisite for the green revolution can befound in the tragedies many years ago. The
slave trade by European countries for as long as
400 years, the 16th to 19th centuries, destroyed
African communities. Young Africans had towork for the nation building of the new worlds
not for SSA. Subsequent colonization continued
for additional 150 years until 1960. These areprobably the main reasons why the basic nationbuilding, i.e., typically the farmers’ fields, is still
stagnating. Thus the farmers’ fields lack basic
infrastructures to accept the green revolution
technologies in SSA (Wakatsuki 2002).

Sawah Hypothesis (II) for intensive
sustainability
Sustainable yield of lowland sawah system isvery high. Although this is based on the long
history and experience (not experiments) of
sawah based rice farming in Asia, there is no
scientificquantitative
confirmation
yet.
Lowland sawah can produce about 2 t/ha without
any chemical fertilizer application (Fig. 10 and
Table 8). In addition the lowland sawah based
farming can support rice cultivation continuously
for decades or more without any fallow.
However sustainable upland slush-and-burn rice
yield without fertilizer never exceeds 1 t/ha. In- 166 １
６
６Why was the Green Revolution not Successful in Sub-Sahara Africa?: Sawah (Suiden) Hypothesis (1)addition to the lower yield, the upland rice fields
need a fallow period to restore soil fertility, suchas two years of upland cultivation and eight,
sometime more than 15 years, of fallow. Thismeans 1 ha of sustainable upland rice cultivationneed at least 5 ha of additional land. Therefore
sustainable upland rice yield is actually not 1 t/ha
but less than 0.2 t/ha. Therefore as shown in the
Table 8, sustainable productivity of sawah based
rice farming is more than ten times higher thanthat of the upland slush-and-burn rice farming(Sawah Hypothesis II). This hypothesis II has tobe examined quantitatively under SSA conditions.
This is the reason why the upland rice cultivation
destroys forest and degrades the land in SSA.
Accordingly, the development of 1 ha of lowland
sawah field enables the conservation orregeneration of more than 10 ha of forest area.
Sawah fields can, therefore contribute to not only
increased food production but also to conserving
the forest, which in turn enhances sustainabilityof intensive lowland sawah systems throughnutrient cycling and geological fertilization
processes. Furthermore, they can contribute to
the alleviation of global warming problems
through the fixation of carbon in forest trees andsawah soils (Wakatsuki and Masunaga 2005,
Darmawan 2006a).

Mechanisms of intensive sustainability oflowland sawah systems(1) Geological fertilization theory
The upper part of Fig. 11 explains what is thegeological fertilization. Although this is a kindof axiom process, quantitative data confirmationis lacking. West African conditions are quite
different from Asia, therefore the watershedcharacterization in terms of upland and lowland
connected sequences is important in relation to
the geological fertilization as shown in Fig.3 and11. The upper part of Fig. 11 shows a conceptof macro-scale ecological engineering, i.e.,watershed ecological engineering and watershedagroforestry. The soils formed and nutrientsreleased during rock weathering and soil
formation processes in upland are accumulated atleast partly in lowland through geologicalfertilization processes, such as soil erosion andsedimentation as well as surface and groundwater movements or colluvial processes. The
sustainable integration of upland forestry, uplandfarming and lowland sawah systems in awatershed composed of a watershed agroforestry,
can be a typical model of watershed ecologicalengineering. The optimum land use pattern andlandscape management practices optimize thegeological fertilization processes through thecontrol of optimum hydrology.
Irrigation,
surface and subsurface water also contributes theincrease of the supply nutrients, such as Si, Ca,
Mg and K as well as sulfate. This is aneco-environmental basis for long-term intensive
sustainability of sawah-based rice farming in
Asia.
World scale sediment delivery data fromvarious river basins in tones per ha per year werereported by Walling (1983).
The Asianmonsoon area, which has the major distributionof sawah based rice farming, has the highestdelivery of sediments by soil erosion as shown in
Fig.9. For the upland based farming, such soil
erosion destroys biological productivity. For
sawah-based rice farming, however, such eroded
topsoil, although the amounts should beappropriate, from the upland is a source of fertile
parent materials for lowland sawah soils. The
appropriate soil erosion can be compensated by
new soil formation in healthy sustainableecosystem in a watershed. Major problem interms of sustainability of the sawah systems inWest Africa may be very limited rates of soil
formation and erosion in comparison with Asianwatersheds (Fig. 9, Wakatsuki 2002). The rates
of both soil erosion and soil formation in West
Africa may be one fifth to one tenth of those of
Asia watersheds. There is, however, no simple
appropriate scientific method to evaluate suchgeological nutrients flows in a given watershed,
except a few examples (Wakatsuki et al 1992,
1993, Rasyidin et al 1994).
Ecologicalengineering researches to evaluate the geologicalfertilization processes and to develop thetechnology to enhance and control the processes
are important in future.

(2) Multi-functionality of sawah systems as
constructed wetland
The lower half of the Fig. 11 shows the micro
scale mechanisms of the intensive sustainabilityof the sawah system. The sawah system can be
managed as multi-functional constructed wetland.
Submerged water can control weeds. Under- 167 １６
７International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

submerged conditions, because of reduction of
ferric iron to ferrous iron, phosphorous
availability is increased and both acid as well as
alkaline soil pH is neutralized or mitigated.
Hence, micronutrients availability is also
increased. These mechanisms encourage not
only the growth of rice plant but also the growthof various aquatic algae and other aerobic andanaerobic microbes, which increase nitrogen
fixation in the sawah system through increase ofphotosynthesis as a functional wetlands. The
technology development and quantitativeevaluation of nitrogen fixation in sawah including
the role of algae will be important future research
topics.
Although the amounts of nitrogen
fixation under the submerged sawah systems are
not well evaluated, the amounts could be
20-100kg/ha/year in Japan and 20-200kg/ha/y intropics depending on the level of soil fertility andwater management (De Datta and Buresh 1986,
Kyuma 2004, Greenland 1997). The technology
development of the nitrogen fixation by sawah
systems, such as 50-200kg N/ha/y, through the
integrated management of water, soil microbes,
algae and rice plant is the very challenging
research subject in SSA. Because of generalvery poor fertility of lowland soils in West Africa(Abe et al 2006, Buri et al 1999, 2000, Issaka et
al 1997, Kyuma et al 1986), these various
multi-functional mechanisms to enhance nutrient
availability of lowland sawah systems are
particularly important for intensive sustainability.
The sawah systems are the field laboratory for
research and technology generation and thefactory for dissemination the technology
developed. Rice green revolution will only berealized in the farmers’ sawah fields (Fig. 7).

Acknowledgement
The authors would like to express their deep
gratitude to the Ministry of Education, Science,Sports and Culture of Japan for financial
assistance, Grant-in-Aid for Specially Promoted
Scientific Research, No. 19002001 and also to the
JSPS for financial assistance for Grant-in-Aid for
Scientific Research (S), No. 15101002.

References
Abe, S. S., Masunaga, T. Yamamoto, S., Honna,
T. and Wakatsuki, T. 2006. Comprehensive
assessment of the clay mineralogicalcomposition of lowland soils in West Africa.
Soil Sci. Plant Nutr. 52: 479-488.
Barrera-Bassols N. and Zinck, J.A. 2000.
Ethnopedology in a Worldwide perspective, An
annotated bibiliography, ITC Publication No.
77, Enschede, the Netherlands,
Buddenhagen, I.W. and Persley, G.J. 1978. Ricein Africa, Academic Press , 355pp
Buri, M. M., Ishida, F., Kubota, D., Masunaga, T.,
and Wakatsuki, T. 1999. Soils of flood plainsof West Africa: general fertility status. Soil Sci.
Plant Nutr. 45: 37-50.
Buri, M. M., Masunaga, T., Wakatsuki, T. 2000.
Sulfur and zinc levels as limiting factors torice production in West Africa lowlands.
Geoderma 94: 23-42.
Darmawan, Kyuma, K., Saleh, H. Subagjo,
Masunaga, T., and Wakatsuki, T. 2006a.
Effect of green revolution technology from 1970
to 2003 on Sawah soil properties in Java,
Indonesia: I. Carbon and nitrogen distribution
under different land management and soil
types, Soil Sci. Plant Nutr., 52(5): 634-644
Darmawan, Kyuma, K., Saleh, H. Subagjo,
Masunaga, T., and Wakatsuki, T. 2006b.
Effect of green revolution technology from 1970
to 2003 on Sawah soil properties in Java,
Indonesia: II. Changes in the chemical
properties of soils, Soil Sci. Plant Nutr., 52(5):645-653
De Datta, S.K. and Buresh, R. J. 1986.
Integrated nitrogen management in irrigatedrice, Adv. Soil Sci., 10:143-169
Eswaran, H., Kimble, J., Cook, T., and Beinroth,
F.H. 1992: Soil Diversity in the Tropics:
Implications for Agricultural Development. In
Lal R and Sanchez P ed., “Myths and Scienceof Soils of the Tropics”, 1-16, SSSA Special
Publication Number 29, Wisconsin, USA
Eswaran, H., Almaraz, R., van den Berg, E. andReich, P. 1997. An assessment of the soil
resources of Africa in relation to productivity.
Geoderma, 77, 1-18
Evenson, R.E. and Gollin, D. 2003. Assessing theimpact of the Green Revolution, 1960 to 2000,
Science, 300:758-762
FAOSTAT 2006

- 168 １
６
８Why was the Green Revolution not Successful in Sub-Sahara Africa?: Sawah (Suiden) Hypothesis (1)Fashola, O.O., Oladele. O., Alabi, M.O.,
Tologbone, D. and Wakatsuki, T. 2007a.
Socio-economic factors influencing the
adoption of Sawah rice production technology
in Nigeria. J. Food, Agriculture &Enivironment-JFAE, 5:239-242
Fashola, O.O., Ademiluyi, Faleye, T, James, D.
and Wakatsuki, T. 2007b. Machinery systems
management of walking tractors (power tillers)
for rice production (Sawah) in Nigeria, . J.
Food, Agriculture & Enivironment-JFAE,
5:284-287
Greenland, D.J. 1997. Sustainability of Rice
Farming, CAB Int’l, U.K. and IRRI, Los
Banos, 273pp
Hirose, H. and Wakatsuki, T. 2002. Restorationof Inalnd Valley Ecosystems in West Africa,
Nourin Tokei Kyoukai, Tokyo. 600pp
Hsieh, S.C. 2003. Agricultural Technology
Transfer to Developing Countries, National
Pintung University of Science and Technology
Press, Taipei, 310pp
IITA 1989/1990. Annual Report 1989/1990
International Institute of Tropical Agriculture,
Ibadan, 20-21pp
Issaka, R. N., Ishida, F., Kubota, D., and
Wakatsuki, T. 1997. Geographical distributionof selected soil fertility parameters of inland
valleys in West Africa. Geoderma 75: 99-116.
Jamin, J.Y. and Widmeijer, P.N. 1995.
Characterization of Inland Valley
Agro-ecosystems: a Tool for their Sustainable
Use. Proceedings of the 1st Scientific
Workshop of the Inland Valley Consortium,
WARDA, Boauke, November 6-10, 1995,
325pp
JICA, 2003. Study on international cooperationin rice farming in West Africa, Japan
International Cooperation Agency, JICA,
Tokyo, 92pp+ Apendixes
Kawaguchi, K. and Kyuma, K. 1977. Paddy Soils
in Tropical Asia, Their Materials, Nature andFertility, University Hawaii Press, pp258,
Kiple, K.F and Ornelas, K.C. 2000. The
Cambridge World History of Food, Cambridge
Univ. Press, Cambridge. 2153pp.
Kyuma, K. 2004. Paddy Soil Science, Kyoto
University Press, Kyoto, 280pp
Kyuma, K., Kosaki, T., and Juo, A.S.R. 1986.
Evaluation of the fertility of the soils. In: The
Wetlands and Rice in Subsaharan Africa Juo,
A. S. R. and J. A. Lowe (Eds) , 43-58pp, Inter.
Inst. Trop. Agric. , Ibadan

Levinson, D.H. 2005. State of the Climate in
2004. BAMS, American MeteorologicalSociety, 1-89pp
Ministry of Food and Agriculture, Ghana 2007a.
Inland valley rice development project,
IVRDP, Consultancy Services for Surveys,
Design and Construction
Supervision of Water Management Structures(LOT 1) PHASE 1, FINAL DESIGNREPORT, 96pp
Ministry of Food and Agriculture, Ghana 2007b.
Inland valley rice development project,
IVRDP, Consultancy Services for Surveys,
Design and Construction
Supervision of Water Management Structures(LOT 5) PHASE 1, FINAL DESIGNREPORT, 55pp
Moormann, F. R., and Veldcamp, W.J. 1978.
Land and rice in Africa: constraints andpotentials. In: Rice in Africa Buddenhagen, I.
W. and G. J. Persley (Eds), pp29-43 Academic
Press, London
Ofori, J., Hisatomi, Y., Kamidouzono, A.,
Masunaga, T., and Wakatsuki, T. 2005.
Performance of Rice Cultivars in Various
Sawah Ecosystems Developed in Inland
Valleys, Ashanti Region, Ghana, Soil Sci.
Plant Nutr., 51:469-476
Okigbo, B.N. 1990. Sustainable Agricultural
Systems in Tropical Africa, In: Sustainable
Agricultural Systems. Edwards, A., Lal, R.,
Madden, P., Miller, R.H., and House. G. (Eds),
pp323-352, SWCS, Iowa
Q ian, W., Debg, Y., Zhu, Y. and Dong, W. 2002.
Demarcating the worldwide monsoon, Theor.
Appl. Climatol. 71:1-16
Rasyidin, A. and Wakatsuki, T. 1994.
Characterization of Precipitation and River
Water Chemistry for Measuring Rates ofWeathering and Soil Formation in Iu-River
Watersheds, Southwestern Japan. Soil Sci.
Plant Nutr., 40:319-332
Ruthenberg, H. 1980. Farming Systems in the
Tropics, Oxford Univ. Press, London, 424pp
Sanchez, P. 1976. Properties and Management ofSoils in Tropics, Wiley & Sons, New York,
619pp
Smaling, E. M. A., Dyfan, T., and Andriesse, W.
1985 a. Detailed Soil Survey and Quantitative
Land Evaluation of the Rogbom-Makene andMatam-Romangoro Benchmark Sites, Makeni,
Sierra Leone, Wetland Utilization Research- 169 １６
９

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Project, Phase II, ILRI, Wageningen, The
Netherlands
Smaling, E. M. A., Kiestra, E., and Andriesse, W.
1985 b. Detailed Soil Survey nd Quantitative
Land Evaluation of the Echin-Woye andKunko Benchmark Sites, Bida, Niger State,
Nigeria, Wetland Utilization Research
Project, Phase II, ILRI, Wageningen, The
Netherlands
Soil Survey Staff, 1998. Keys to Soil Taxonomy,
6th ed., SMSS of USDA, Washington DC,
306pp
Soil Survey Staff, 1999. Soil Taxonomy, A Basic
System of Soil Classification for Making andInterpreting Soil Surveys, Natural Resources
Conservation Service of USDA, Washington
D C, 869pp
Takase, K. and Kano, T., 1969. “Development
Strategies on Irrigation and Drainage” in Asian
Agriculture Survey, Asian Development Bank,
520pp
Tian, G., Ishiada, F., and Keatinge, D. 2001.
Sustaining Soil Fertility in West Africa, SSSA
Special Pub. No.58, 321pp
Trenberth, K.E., Stepaniak, D.P., Caron, J.M.
2000. The Global Monsoon as Seen throughthe Divergent Atmospheric Circulation.
Journal of Climate, 13:3969-3993
Wakatsuki, T. 2002. Sustainable agricultura
development of West Africa during global
environmental crises, In : Restoration ofInland Valley Ecosystems in West Africa.
Hirose, S. and Wakatsuki, T. (Eds), pp1-82,
Nourin Tokei Kyoukai, Tokyo
Wakatsuki, T. and Rasyidin, A. 1992. Rates ofWeathering and Soil Formation, Geoderma
52:251-261
Wakatsuki, T., Rasyidin, A., and Naganawa, T.
1993. Multiple Regression Method for
Estimating Rates of Weathering and Soil
Formation in Watersheds. Soil Sci. Plant Nutr.,
39:153-159
Wakatsuki, T., Shinmura, Y., Otoo, E., andOlaniyan. 1998. Sawah system for integrated
watershed management of small inland valleys
in West Africa. In FAO ed., Water Report
N0.17, Institutional and Technical Options in
the Development and Management of Small
Scale Irrigation, pp45-60, FAO, Rome
Wakatsuki, T., Otoo, E., Andah, W.E.I., Cobbina,J., Buri, M.M., and Kubota, D. (eds). 2001.
Integrated Watershed Management of Inland
Valley in Ghana and West Africa:

Eco-technology Approach, Final Report on
JICA/CRI joint study project, CRI, Kumasi,
Ghana and JICA, Tokyo, 337pp
Wakatsuki, T. and Masuanga, T. 2005. EcologicalEngineering for Sustainabel Food Production
and the Restoration of Degraded Waterheds in
Tropics of low pH Soils: Focus on West Africa.
Soil Sci. Plant Nutr., 51:629-636
Wakatsuki, T., Buri, M.M., and Fashola, O.O.
2005. Ecological Engineering for sustainable
rice production and the restoration of degradedwatersheds in West Africa. In: Rice is life:
Scientific Perspectives for the 21st Century.
Toriyama, K., Heong, K.L., and Hardey,
B.(Eds), pp363-366, IRRI, JIRCAS, NARO,
NIAS, NIAES, NIRE, APO, MAFF, Tsukuba
Walling, D.H. 1983. The sediment delivery
problem. J. Hydrological Sci., 65:209-237
WARDA 1988. WARDA’s Strategic Plan:
1990-2000. Bouake. 66pp.
WARDA, 2002. The African Rice Initiative(ARI): NERICA Consortium Security in Sub
Saharan Africa. 40pp.
WARDA, 2004. Strategic Plan: 2003-2012,
WARAD-The Africa Rice Center, Bouake.
58pp
Windmeijer, P.N. and Andriesse, W. 1993. Inland
Valley in West Africa: An Agroecological
Characterization of Rice-Growing
Environment, ILRI, Wageningen, 160pp.

- 170 １７０Why was the Green Revolution not Successful in Sub-Sahara Africa?: Sawah (Suiden) Hypothesis (1)Table 6 Comparison between biotechnology and eco-technology options for improvement ofrice production(1) For Water shortage and flooding
Biotechnology: Genes for deep rooting, tolerance in submergence, C4-nature, Osmotic
regulation genes,
Eco-technology of Sawah based soil and water management, bunding, leveling, puddling,
well, weir, tank irrigation, and System rice intensification. Dyke construction
and drainage(2) For Poor nutrition, acidity and alkalinity
Biotechnology: Gene of Phosphate and micronutrient transporter
Eco-technology of Sawah based N fixation, increase P availability and micro- as well as
macronutrient. Geological fertilization, Watershed agro-forestry, organic
matter and fertilization. Use of birds feculent for the enrichment of P.
(3) For Weed control
Biotechnology: Gene of weed competition, rapid growth.
Eco-technology of Sawah based weed management through water control andtrans-planting. Leveling quality of sawah is important. Duck and rice
farming.
(4) For Pest and disease control
Biotechnology: Resistance genes.
Eco-technology of Sawah based silica and other nutrients supply to enhance immune
mechanisms of rice. Mixed cropping.
(5) For Food quality
Biotechnology: Vitamin rice gene.
Eco-technology of Sawah based nutrition control. Fish, duck and rice in sawah systems(6) For Carbon Sequestration
Biotechnology: Breeding of high biomass productive genes
Eco-technology: High biomass production and conservation of soil organic matter in Sawah
soil

Table 7

Distribution of lowlands in Sub Sahara Africa

Windmeijer and Andriesse (1993); Sawah area estimation by Wakatsuki (2002)
Classification

Area (million ha)

Percentage (%)

Coastal swamps

16.5

(3-5)

7

(17)

Inland basins

107.5

(1-4)

45

(10)

Flood plains

30.0(5-10)

12(31)

Inland valleys

85.0(5-15)

36(42)

Figures in parentheses are the potential area of sawah development (million ha):Maximum total area in SSA may be 20 million ha. This estimation is based on the data that the relative amount of rain fallin Asia Pacific monsoon is five times bigger than that of SSA and sawah area in Asia is 100 million ha currently.

- 171 １７
１International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Fig. 7 Sawah hypothesis (I):
Hypothetical contribution of three green revolution technologies and sawah eco-technology
during 1960-2005 and during 2005-2050 in Sub Sahara Africa and Asia.
The bold lines during 1960-2005 are based on mean rice yields based on FAOSTAT 2006.
Bold lines during 2005-2050 are the expected or target trend based on the sawah hypothesis (I)by the authors.

- 172 １
７
２Why was the Green Revolution not Successful in Sub-Sahara Africa?: Sawah (Suiden) Hypothesis (1)water, fertilizer & soil mgt, legume,manure, animal traction, power tiller,
fish and rice vegetable after rice,
BNF, iron toxicity, P deficiency, IPM,
striga, weed mgt, cover crops,
cropping systems research, CH4emission, carbon sequestration,
Aerobic rice, SRI, system riceintensification, etc. crop physiology,
long-term field experiments

IGNRM for Green Revolution Technology

IGNRM

Rice
variety

Rice
Environment
Improvementand dissemination
technology

Improvement
dissemination
technology

High yield
High quality
High tolerance

Fig. 8

Missing link
is “Sawah”
in SSAfrica

Eco-technologically demarcated field forwater
management has to exist:
High-quality leveled rice field (㼼5cm)
High-quality bunded rice field (no leaking)High-quality puddled rice field (nursery )Concept of “Integrated Genetic and Natural Resources Management (IGNRM)”
for green revolution technology:
The missing link is Sawah which is lacking in the majority of famers’ fields.

- 173 １
７
３International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Can watersheds in SSA sustain the Sawah system?
The high rates of soil erosion and lowland sawah soil formation can be compensatedby high rate of soil formation: Again, ecological balance is a Key

Sediment Yieldt. ha-2. yr-1
10.0
7.5
5.0
2.5
1.0
0.5
Deserts andpermanent ice

Fig. 9Rates of soil erosion in the Worlds (Walling 1983)- 174 １
７
４Why was the Green Revolution not Successful in Sub-Sahara Africa?: Sawah (Suiden) Hypothesis (1)Farmers’ Sawah fields are the most important infrastructure.

Farmers’ fields come first.
Japanese experience

World population: Max.

㸽10billion?
Japanese population: Max.

Japan’s Green Revolution
Immediately after the contact with
Euro-American chemical fertilizer technologies

Before Green Revolution
Long efforts had been
continued for expanding the Sawah systems.

Rapid Sawah expansion & decrease in Japan

Transition of population, rice yields, and Sawah areas in Japanin comparison with Asia and Africa(Takase & Kano, 1969, modified)Fig. 10 Historical paths of rice yields & Sawah areas in Japan in comparison with rice yields
in Asia and Africa with Japanese and the world population trends in the past andnear future. (JICA 2003, modified)- 175 １７
５International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8(1) Concept of “Watershed Ecological Engineering” and “Watershed Agroforestry”
The optimum landuse pattern and landscape management practices optimize the geological fertilization
through the control of optimum hydrology in watershed. Because of geological fertilization, lowland canreceive water, nutirents, and fertile topsoils from upland. Sawah system enhances to utilize such geologicalfertilization flows.

(2) Sawah system as multi-functionally constructed wetland for enhanced supply of N, P, Si and other nutrients.
Technological development for enhancing multi-functionality of wetland sawah in a diverse agro-ecologies
for SSA is a key in IGNRM.

Fig. 11(1) Macro- and (2) Micro-scale ecological mechanisms ofintensive sustainability of lowland sawah systems- 176 １
７
６Why was the Green Revolution not Successful in Sub-Sahara Africa?: Sawah (Suiden) Hypothesis (1)Why was the Green Revolution not Successful in
the Sub-Saharan Africa?: Sawah (SUIDEN) Hypothesis (1)T. Wakatsuki, Kinki University
Guinea, Aug.03

No Sawah, No Green Revolution

Inland valley, Sierra
Leone, Jan.89
Water control through sawah system is a prerequisite for Green Revolution in SSA

Fish &

Nupe’s indigenous rudimentary
sawah system, Nigeria,Sep.05

Rice

CRI/JICA Sawah Project, Ghana, Aug.01

Production trend (kg/person) of diversified
African crops in comparison with Asia

Asia

Production(kg/person)
350
300
250

SSA

(kg/person)

200

200

M illetSorghum
Yams (1/5)
Cassava (1/8)
M aizeWheat-Imp ort
Wheat
Paddy Rice-Import
Rice, Paddy

150

150

100

100

50

50

0
1961

䠍䠑䠌䡇䡃 paddy/person/year can supply
All necessary calories and proteins

1966

1971

1976

1981

1986

1991

1996

0
1961

2001

Year

1966 1971

1976 1981
Year

1986 1991

1996 2001

African crops are diverse. Even though the production potential of rice is higher thanthe demand, rice is imported. Wheat has not enough production potential in the majorityof SSA countries. Rice is also the highest quality cereals
in terms of egg protein equivalent compared the other 6 crops- 177 １７
７International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Bangkok Airport 05

Lagos Airport, Aug. 05

What is “sawah” ?

Farmers fields are demarcatedNo clear demarcation

Dar es Salaam airport, July 06

Northeastern plateau area in Thailand, July 06

Farmers’ Fields:
Diverse and mixed-up
environments
APCDEFAFIZPCM
GMDUGHIGKCDILMBNNPQ TBBAACIGHOLKJDBVIRNJUAHGDNVAPCDEFAFTGMDUGHIGKCDILMGHOLNH
NPQ TBBAACIGHX LKJDHGLP
IRNJUAHGDNVGHOLKNPSDTBBAACIGHYLKJDIRNJHG
UAHGDNVAPCDEFKLG
A B GHIGKCDIMB

Sawah-based ecotechnology:

Diverse and well-characterized,
classified and improved riceenvironment; water controllable fields
are especially prerequisites.
BB

AA
FF
JJ

EE

CC

D

HH

II

K
K

MM LL

Diverse crops,
Mixed farming systems,
Mixed-up varieties:A B C D E……
Fertilizer, irrigation, and HYV are noteffective; No Green Revolution possible.

pure variety A
pure variety B
pure variety C
pure variety D
Sawah-based
Farming System

Fig. 7 Successful Integrated Genetic and Natural
Resource Management needs
classified and demarcated land ecotechnology.

- 178 １
７
８Why was the Green Revolution not Successful in Sub-Sahara Africa?: Sawah (Suiden) Hypothesis (1)Biotechnology
Rice variety

and

and

ecotechnology

Rice with Sawah System

Water inWater out
Sawah is a man-made, improved rice growing environment
with demarcated, bunded, leveled, and puddled fields forwater control. Sawah is soil-based ecotechnology.

Varieties could
solve the main
problems in Asia.

Is that also
true in SSA?

Because of the diversity of soil, geology, topography,hydrology, climate, vegetation and socio-cultural conditions,the technologies for development and management ofsawah are highly diverse. Therefore, we have to researchand develop the technologies for accommodating to diverse
SSA ecology.

Fig. 2 Rice (variety) and environment (Sawah) both in bio &ecotechnologies must be improved and developed in a balanced manner.

IGNRM for Green Revolution Technologies

IGNRM

Rice
variety

Improvement
dissemination
technology
High yield
High quality
High tolerance

Water, fertilizer and soil mgt, legume,manure, animal traction ,power tiller, fish
and rice vegetable after rice, BNF, irontoxicity, P deficiency, IPM, Striga, weed
mgt, cover crops, cropping system research,
CH4 emission, carbon sequestration, etc.
crop physiology, long-term field experiments.

Rice
Environment
Improvementand dissemination
technology

Missing link
is “sawah”
in SSAfrica

Eco-technologically demarcated fields for water
management has to exist:
High quality leveled rice field (㼼5cm)
High quality bunded rice field (no leaking)High quality puddled rice field (nursery )Fig. 8 Concept of Integrated Genetic and Natural Resources Management(IGNRM) for green revolution technologies
The missing link is Sawah which is lacking in the majority of famers’ fields- 179 １７
９International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Farmers’ sawah fields are the most important infrastructure.

Farmers’ Fields come First. Japanese Experience

Before Green
Revolution,
long efforts had
been continued
to expand
The sawah system

Japan’s Green Revolution,
immediately after contact with
Euro-American chemicalfertilizer technologies

Rapid sawah expansion &decrease

Population, rice yields & sawah areas of historical path inJapan in comparison with Asia & Africa Takase & Kano,1969, modified

Sawah: Lacking in the Concept, Terms andEcotechnologies
This has been disturbing the balanced approach for ricedevelopment in West Africa and SSA in the last 30 years.

Confusion about paddy, irrigation, water control,
and the sawah system
Farmers’ work

Governmental work
• Sawah Hypothesis (1): Prerequisites for Green Revolution:
Are the farmers’ field conditions ready to accept
the irrigation water, fertilizer and HYV, or not?
• Sawah Hypothesis (2): We have to overcome the scarce nutrients
and water. Sustainable rice productivity under the sawah system is10-15 times higher than those in upland rice fields.
z㼃㼑㻌㼙㼡㼟㼠㻌㼞㼑㼙㼑㼙㼎㼑㼞㻌㼠㼔㼍㼠㻌㼘㼍㼏㼗㻌㼛㼒㻌㼠㼔㼑㻌㼏㼛㼚㼏㼑㼜㼠㻌㻒㻌㼠㼑㼞㼙㼟㻌㼙㼍㼐㼑㻌㼠㼔㼑㻌䇾㼀㼟㼡㼚㼍㼙㼕䇿 㼐㼕㼟㼍㼟㼠㼑㼞㻌㼑㼚㼛㼞㼙㼛㼡㼟㻌㼕㼚㻌㻿㼡㼙㼍㼠㼞㼍㻚- 180 １８０Why was the Green Revolution not Successful in Sub-Sahara Africa?: Sawah (Suiden) Hypothesis (1)No proper English/French ecotechnologicalconcept and term to improve farmers’ rice fields,
Sawah or SUIDEN (in Japanese)㻿㼡㼕㼐㼑㼚㻌
㻔㻶㼍㼜㼍㼚㼑㼟㼑㻕㻼㼘㼍㼚㼠㻮㼕㼛㼠㼑㼏㼔㼚㼛㼘㼛㼓㼥㻱㼚㼢㼕㼞㼛㼚㼙㼑㼚㼠㻱㼏㼛㼠㼑㼏㼔㼚㼛㼘㼛㼓㼥㻩㻿㻭㼃㻭㻴䠄㻹㼍㼘㼍㼥㻙㻵㼚㼐㼛㼚㼑㼟㼕㼍㼚䠅㻱㼚㼓㼘㼕㼟㼔

㻵㼚㼐㼛㼚㼑㼟㼕㼍㼚㻯㼔㼕㼚㼑㼟㼑䠄₎Ꮠ䠅

㻾㼕㼏㼑

㻺㼍㼟㼕

⡿䠈㣤䠈✄

㻼㼍㼐㼐㼥

㻼㼍㼐㼕

✄䠈⢄

㻔㻼㼍㼐㼐㼥㻕㻌㻫

㻿㼍㼣㼍㼔

Ỉ⏣

Weeds are stronger: upland rice, Bida

Nupe’s traditional partial water control system

Nupe’s indigenous partial
water control system

No ecotechnology measures

Once the sawah system is developed by
farmers with their self-support efforts
and the water is controlled,

Inland Valley, Sierra Leone

the majority of HYV can produce 5 t/ha or higher- 181 １８
１International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

The mean gain yields of 23 rice cultivars in lowland ecologies at low (LIL)
and high input levels (HIL), Ashanti, Ghana (Ofori & Wakatsuki, 2005)
Entry No. Cultivar

ECOTECHNOLOGICAL YIELD IMPROVEMENT
Rainfed sawah
Upland-like fields

Irrigated sawah
HIL

LIL

HIL

BIOTECHNOLOGICAL IMPROVEMENT(t/ha)

1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
21
22
23

WAB
EMOK
PSBRC34PSBRC54PSBRC66
BOAK189
WITA 8Tox3108
IR5558
IR58088IR54742C123CUCT9737CT8003
CT9737-P
WITA1
WITA3
WITA4
WITA6
WITA7
WITA9
WITA12
GK88

4.6
4.0
7.7
8.0
5.7
7.0
7.8
7.1
7.9
7.7
7.7
6.9
6.5
7.3
8.2
7.6
7.6
8.0
8.0
7.3
7.6
7.6
7.5

LIL

HIL

(t/ha)

2.9
2.8
3.5
3.7
3.3
3.8
4.2
4.1
4.0
4.0
4.3
4.1
4.0
3.8
4.0
3.6
3.5
4.1
3.5
3.7
4.4
4.0
3.8

2.8
2.9
3.0
3.8
3.8
3.7
4.4
4.0
3.8
3.7
4.0
4.2
4.0
3.8
4.3
3.3
4.1
3.7
4.0
3.8
4.5
3.8
3.5

LIL
(t/ha)

1.6
1.3
2.1
2.1
2.0
2.0
2.1
2.3
2.0
1.8
2.2
1.9
1.7
1.7
1.8
1.8
2.0
2.1
2.3
2.2
2.8
1.9
2.0

2.1
1.4
2.0
1.7
1.8
1.4
1.8
2.3
1.8
1.4
1.9
2.0
1.9
2.0
1.2
0.9
1.3
1.5
1.4
2.0
2.0
1.8
1.8

0.6
0.5
0.4
0.4
0.4
0.3
0.5
0.6
0.5
0.3
0.4
0.4
0.6
0.5
0.5
0.3
0.5
0.3
0.3
0.4
0.6
0.4
0.5

Mean (n=23)

7.2

3.8

3.8

2.0

1.7

0.4

Range
SD

(4.0-8.2)
1.51(2.8-4.4)
0.81(2.8-4.5)
0.81(1.3-2.8)
0.45(0.9-2.3)
0.44(0.3-0.6)
0.12

Due to the cost of green revolution technology, the yield must be higher than 4 t/ha㼃㼑㼟㼠㻌㻭㼒㼞㼕㼏㼍㻌㻹㼍㼜㻌㼟㼔㼛㼣㼕㼚㼓㻌㼠㼔㼑㻌㼟㼑㼘㼑㼏㼠㼑㼐㻌㼟㼍㼙㼜㼘㼕㼚㼓㻌㼟㼕㼠㼑㼟㻌㼛㼒㻌㼘㼛㼣㼘㼍㼚㼐㻌㼟㼛㼕㼘㼟㻚㻌㻔㻮㼡㼞㼕 㼍㼚㼐㻌㼃㼍㼗㼍㼠㼟㼡㼗㼕㻘㻌㻞㻜㻜㻜㻕- 182 １８
２Why was the Green Revolution not Successful in Sub-Sahara Africa?: Sawah (Suiden) Hypothesis (1)The mean values of fertility properties of inland valleys (IVS)
and flood plains (FLP) of West Africa in comparison withlowland top-soils of tropical Asia and Japan
Exchangeable Cation (cmol/kg)

Total
C (%)

Total
N (%)

Available
P (ppm)**

Ca

K

Mg

IVS

1.3

0.11

9

1.9

0.3

0.9

FLP

1.1

0.10

7

5.6

T. Asia*

1.4

0.13

18

Japan

3.3

0.29

57

Location

eCEC

Sand
(%)

Clay
(%)

CEC
/Clay

4.2

60

17

25

0.5

2.7 10.3 48

29

36

10.4

0.4

5.5 17.8 34

38

47

9.3

0.4

2.8 12.9 49

21

61*Kawaguchi and Kyuma (529 sites), 1977,** Bray II.
Source: Hirose and Wakatsuki (268 sites), 1997.

㻦㻌㻾㼕㼢㼑㼞㻌㼒㼘㼛㼛㼐㻌㼜㼘㼍㼕㼚㼟㻦㻌㻵㼚㼘㼍㼚㼐㻌㼢㼍㼘㼘㼑㼥㻌㼟㼣㼍㼙㼜㼟S & Zn Deficiency: The frequency distribution of
topsoil (0-15cm) available nutrients in West Africa
lowlands. (Buri & Wakatsuki. 2001)- 183 １８
３International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

How can we overcome such low level
nutrients & scarce water in
Sub Sahara West Africa?
• Developing lowland sawah is the answer.
• The integrated management of lowland &upland such as watershed agro-forestry is also
the key ecotechnology.
• The core region of West Africa has similar
climate, soil, hydrology and crops to those in
the northeastern Thailand; the important site in
Asian-African collaboration in the future.

Sawah hypothesis (II): Sustainable productivity oflowland sawah fields are more than 10 times higher thanthe upland fields; This is not scientifically experimented
results, but experienced results in Asia
1 ha sawah = 10-15ha of upland

Area (%)
Productivity (t/ha)
Required area forsustainable 1 ha croppingUplandLowland (Sawah)

95 %1-3 1<= **5%
3-6 2**

5 ha

䠖

1 ha

* Assuming 2 years cultivation and 8 years fallow insustainable upland cultivation, while no fallow in sawah**In the case of no fertilization- 184 １８
４Why was the Green Revolution not Successful in Sub-Sahara Africa?: Sawah (Suiden) Hypothesis (1)Macro- and Micro-scale
Ecological Mechanisms of
Intensive Sustainability of
Lowland Sawah System(1) Geological
Fertilization: the lowland
can receive water,
nutrients, and fertile
topsoil from the uplands.
(2) Multi-functional
Constructed wetlands forcontrolling weeds andenhancing supply of N, P,
Si, and other Nutrients(0.5~ 10%)The concept of Watershed ecotechnology.
i.e.,(1)Watershed Agro-forestry and(2)Multi-functional sawah-type wetland are the key components- 185 １８
５

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8Japanese Inland Valley (SATO-YAMA
systems): Integration of forests, ponds
and lowland sawah in watersheds

Sawah is Multi-Functional
Wetland: Rice, Algae, andMicrobes’ Complex Ecosystems

Accumulation of topsoil, water, and nutrients through watershed agroforestry

N-fixation, increasing P availability and pH neutralization- 186 １８
６Why was the Green Revolution not Successful in Sub-Sahara Africa?: Sawah (Suiden) Hypothesis (1)Examples of eco-technological research &development䠍䠕䠔䠒䠉present䠍䠕䠕䠐䠉present

Two benchmark watersheds in Ghana & Nigeria. This map
shows the countries with the major ethnic groups inWest Africa

CRI-CSIR/JICA Sawah Project for
integrated watershed management, 1997-2001- 187 １８
７International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8㻾㼍㼕㼚㼒㼍㼘㼘㻌䠖㻝㻡㻜㻜㼙㼙Long last springs 㼃㼍㼠㼑㼞㼟㼔㼑㼐㼟 㻝㻜㻜㼔㼍
ideal for sawah㼠㼑㼟㼠㼑㼐 㻡㻜㻜㼔㼍
Shallow groundwater for pumpirrigation

Flood prone sites
Fish pond &irrigation㻟㻜㻜㻜㼔㼍
㻤㻜㻜㻜㼔㼍
㻟㻜㻜㻜㻜㼔㼍

Land tenure& allotment

Weak river flow
Upland use problem?

㻟㻜㻜㻜㼔㼍 㻡㻜㻜㼔㼍 㻝㻜㻜㼔㼍
Weak but steady flow Drought prone㻤㻜㻜㻜㼔㼍Steady water flow for ideal
weir & pump irrigation㻾㼑㼟㼑㼍㼞㼏㼔 㼟㼕㼠㼑㼟 㼟㼔㼛㼣㼕㼚㼓 㼠㼔㼑 㼘㼛㼏㼍㼠㼕㼛㼚 㼛㼒 㼠㼞㼍㼚㼟㼑㼏㼠㼟 㼕㼚 㼠㼔㼑 㼣㼍㼠㼑㼞㼟㼔㼑㼐㼟㻚

Although hydrology is the base for success of sawah, the performanceof various ecotechnologies in watershed can be evaluated by water flow.

- 188 １８
８Why was the Green Revolution not Successful in Sub-Sahara Africa?: Sawah (Suiden) Hypothesis (1)Sustainablesawah

Transect line

Unsustainablesawah

Top survey: Inland valley, Ashanti, Ghana㻯㼞㼛㼟㼟㻙㼟㼑㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼛㼒㻌㼠㼛㼜㼛㼓㼞㼍㼜㼔㼥㻘㻌㼞㼍㼕㼚㼒㼍㼘㼘㻌㼜㼍㼠㼠㼑㼞㼚㻘㻌㼓㼞㼛㼡㼚㼐㻛㼟㼡㼞㼒㼍㼏㼑㻌㼣㼍㼠㼑㼞㻌㼍㼚㼐㻌㼘㼍㼚㼐㻌㼡㼟㼑㻌㼐㼥㼚㼍㼙㼕㼏㼟㻌㼕㼚㻌㼟㼠㼞㼑㼍㼙㻌㼒㼘㼛㼣㻌㼕㼚㼘㼍㼚㼐㻌㼢㼍㼘㼘㼑㼥
㻔㼀㼞㼍㼚㼟㼑㼏㼠㻌㻡㻕㻘㻌㻰㼣㼕㼚㼥㼍㼚
㼣㼍㼠㼑㼞㼟㼔㼑㼐㻘㻌㻭㼟㼔㼍㼚㼠㼕㻌㻾㼑㼓㼕㼛㼚㻘㻌㻳㼔㼍㼚㼍㻚

Canal construction by farmers

Simple barrage by farmers’ efforts- 189 １
８
９

Spring irrigated rudimentary sawah, Nupe

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Manual leveling needs hard works forsawah system construction

Sawah construction can be done byfarmers’ self-support efforts

Power-tiller operated leveling, Ashanti, Ghana
Sawah can/must be produced by farmers

The leveling needs skilled &concerted works

Sawah is ecotechnology-based multi functional constructed wetland:
Production, Environment, and Cultural LandscapeTermitemound

Inland valley, Ashanti, Ghana- 190 １９０Why was the Green Revolution not Successful in Sub-Sahara Africa?: Sawah (Suiden) Hypothesis (1)Inland Valley Rice Development Project, World Bank,
2004-2009, Biemso, Ashanti, Ghana, Aug 2005

Inland Valley Rice Development Project,World Bank, 4500ha in 2004-2009
Biemso, Ashanti, Ghana, Aug 2005

- 191 １９１International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8Inland Valley Rice Development Project,World Bank, 4500 ha in 2004-2009
Biemso, Ashanti, Ghana, Aug 2005

Upland

water

[ W]

Water
harvestablelowlandspringWater tableand ground
water

[ S]
spring irrigablesloped lowland

contour bund

sawah

flood
prone
lowland[ F] riverlowland but
upland ecology
[ L]
[ U]
typical irrigable [ U]lowland

Irrigation options: Sawah to sawah/contour bund water harvesting,spring, dyke, river, pump, peripheral canal, interceptor canal, tank
Lowland sawah development priority[ S] > [ L] > [ F] > [ W] > [ U]Concept of characterization and quantitative mapping of lowland
diversity for sawah development (bunded, leveled, puddled riceland), depending on the watershed land use, lowland topography,
soil, hydrology and Agroecological zones- 192 １９
２Why was the Green Revolution not Successful in Sub-Sahara Africa?: Sawah (Suiden) Hypothesis (1):Rice farmer’s field demarcation
based on soil, water, andtopography is the starting point for scientific observation,technology generation, and application.
Upland leveling & bunding
are limited only for good soil

Lowland is thetarget for levelingand bunding.
Sawah System Research &Development

Water table and water management continuum (WARDA2004, 2006)

Can watersheds in SSA sustain the sawah system? The highrate of soil erosion and lowland sawah soil formation can becompensated by the high rate of soil formation:
Again, Ecological Balance is a Key㻿㼑㼐㼕㼙㼑㼚㼠㻌㼅㼕㼑㼘㼐㼠㻚㻌㼔㼍㻙㻞㻚㻌㼥㼞㻙㻝
㻝㻜㻚㻜
㻣㻚㻡
㻡㻚㻜
㻞㻚㻡
㻝㻚㻜
㻜㻚㻡
㻰㼑㼟㼑㼞㼠㼟㻌㼍㼚㼐㻌㼜㼑㼞㼙㼍㼚㼑㼚㼠㻌㼕㼏㼑

Fig. 1 Rate of soil erosion in the world (Walling1983)- 193 １９３International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Table 2 Estimation of rice production trends by each rice ecology inWest Africa during 1984-1999/2003
The 2015 estimation is by the author(WARDA Strategic Plan in 1988, African Rice Initiative 2002, Sakurai 2003,
WARDA Strategic Plan 2004, FAOSTAT 2005)
Area(million ha)
1984 1999/03 2015

(million ton/y)1984 1999/03 2015

Yield
(t/ha)
1984 1999/03 2015

1.5
1.8 2.0
57% 40% 30%

1.5
42%

1.8
2.0
23% 13%1
1
1
No yield increase

Rainfedlowland

0.53

3.0

0.75

3.4

7.0

1.4

2.0

2.4

Irrigatedlowland0.23 0.56 0.80

0.64

1.9

3.0

2.8

3.4

3.8

Total

2.6

3.4

7.7

14

1.3

1.6

2.4

Uplandcontribution

Production

(%)

1.8

4.7

6.0

Distribution of lowlands and potential irrigated sawah in SSA(Hekstra, Andriesse, Windmeijer 1983 & 1993,
Irrigated sawah areas estimation by Wakatsuki 2002)

Classification

Area (million ha)

Percentage(%)

Coastal swamps

16.5 (3-5)

10-30%

Inland basins

107.5 (1-4)

1-3%

Flood plains

30.0 (5-10)

10-30

Inland valleys

85.0 (5-15)

3-10

Possible areas of sawah development (million ha)
Max. 20 million ha(Estimated sawah areas came from the relative amount of water cycle in
Monsoon Asia which has 100 million ha of sawah)- 194 １９
４Why was the Green Revolution not Successful in Sub-Sahara Africa?: Sawah (Suiden) Hypothesis (1)Conclusions•

Different from Asia, SSA’s Green Revolution will be led
by sawah type ecotechnology.
• The upland rice should be given low priority and be
discouraged if lowland sawah development is possible.
• Major Constrains are:(1) Demarcation of appropriate lowlands for sawah
development(2) Land-ownership systems to encourage sawah
development(3) Small machinery to accelerate the sawah development(4) Education and training systems for sawah development
and management

Conclusion: Ecology
and Environment Based
Conclusion:
Integrated
ecotechnology
and biotechnology are
the base for
African
type
Green Revolatuion
Rudimentary
African Green Revolution

Sawah in Central Nigeria in 2004
• Now, the number of sawah based rice
farmers who are consciously conducting
water and soil management steadily
increased in past 15 years, prerequisite• Therefore within 10 years, the green
revolution will be realized in West Africa,
These are still rudimentary sawah (Bida, Nigeria), but the• Ifproperbalancedandpolicy were
numberof sawah-based
ricestrategy
farmers whoare consciously
developing
waterfor& soilmanagement
systems
are steadily
increasing
adoptedAfricantype
green
revolution
in the past 15 years. The prerequisites will be soon satisfied
therefore within 10-20 years, and the green revolution will be
realized in SSA, especially in West Africa, if properly balanced
strategy & policy were adopted for African green revolution.

- 195 １９５

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8ឋွࣖሉ
3WGUVKQP CPF #PUYGT 5GUUKQP䝃䝤䝃䝝䝷䜰䝣䝸䜹䛷䛿ఱᨾ⥳䛾㠉࿨䛜㐜䜜䛯䛛䠛䠖㻌 Ỉ⏣௬ㄝ䠄䠍䠅
Why was the Green Revolution not Successful in Sub-Sahara Africa? :Sawah (Suiden) Hypothesis (1)ⱝ᭶㻌 ฼அ㻌 㻌 Toshiyuki Wakatsuki㏆␥኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫ㒊ᩍᤵ
Professor, Faculty of Agriculture, Kinki University, Japanྖ఍䠖㻌 ᮡᮏ㻌 ඘㑥㻌 Chair person: Mitsukuni Sugimotoྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫᅜ㝿ᩍ⫱༠ຊ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊㻌 ෸ᩍᤵ
Associate Professor, ICCAE, Nagoya University

Sugimoto, Chair:Thank you very much, Professor Wakatsuki. Professor Wakatsuki has
mentioned about utilization of water system in Africa and Asia. He mentioned
about the difference of the Green Revolution in Africa and that in Asia. I’dlike to ask the participants. Are there any questions?

Iijima:Thank you very much for your presentation. Initially, you have mentionedthat it is farmers who can develop the sawah system. However, I understandyour conclusion as the government or donors should develop the sawah system.
Which do you think is the case?

Wakatsuki:
I said the big irrigation scheme should be led by the government. On theother hand, works for the farmers’ fields including the sawah systemdevelopment should be led by the farmers. Fortunately in the case of Ghana,
we have developed quality sawah systems which secure paddy yield higher than
4 t/ha, through farmers’ self-support efforts. However, the sustainability of thesawah systems developed may be affected by the landowner systems.
Therefore, we have to research in order to adjust or to modify the present
landowner systems for sustaining and encouraging the sawah development.

Iijima:Do you mean that the farmers themselves can solve their landownershipproblems? Because it’s a very legal system, it must be the government which
can solve this kind of landowner system.
Wakatsuki:
Since sawah systems can give much higher yield comparing to traditional
rice production, some sawah farmers get some money power to solve the land
tenure problems. But the other farmers may loss shortly after the sawah
systems developed by the request of landowner. The important point is how
we can adjust/modify/change such an African way of landownership system toencourage sawah system development.
Maybe we had better to ask Professor Onyango. Is there any possibility ofencouraging African people to develop their own landowner systems toencourage agricultural development?

- 196 １９
６Why was the Green Revolution not Successful in Sub-Sahara Africa?: Sawah (Suiden) Hypothesis (1)Onyango:I think it is possible. The presentation was very productive and you
indicated that the problem of sawah system is with the government especiallyon the infrastructure which is the same as the conclusions I reached in mypresentation. The land ownership system if at all it has to be done legal must
be done by the government. Therefore the government still comes in as the as
farmer can not work in a vacuum. A farmer cannot develop the Sawah system
you are talking about if they are not sure whether they will own that land
tomorrow or not. Therefore the government still comes in. The idea you aretrying to put up is correct but you need to integrate them, so that we know
which part the farmer can play and which part the government plays. It is thegovernment which has to come in first, because they have to demarcate land,issue title deeds transferring the ownership to farmers whether male or female.
After that the Sawah system can be developed and the green revolution will takeoff. I think that is the approach. Thank you.

Iijima:Thank you very much for your presentation. I think even if the land tenure
problems are solved by changing the policy of the government, what is themechanism to disseminate or to accelerate the lowland development by farmers.
That is my first question. And the second is, what do you mean by the word
“discouraging lowland rice systems through the active promotion of upland
NERICA”? Do you mean that they might abandon their upland rice? And
my third question is, at first you said the farmers are not ready to accept thegreen revolution technologies. What does the “accept” mean? Does it meanthat the farmers still can not accept the green revolution technologies? Or, is it
merely a problem of availability or something like that? What do you mean by“accept”?

Wakatsuki:
Actually, I don’t know much about the approach of the dissemination of
sawah technologies regarding your first question. Establishing an institutionalorganization is very important for developing the sawah system. However, themost important thing will be how we can organize the mechanisms or systems
to give the training for sawah technologies to many, maybe ten million
Sub-Sahara African farmers, and encourage them to improve their yields
through sawah systems. How can we do this in a relatively short time?
I think the key issue is training farmers in sawah technologies. We have totrain numerous leading farmers in each country. Then such leading farmers
will train the groups of their neighboring farmers. This farmer-to-farmer
training system will be important. To train the leading farmers, I suggest themassive collaborative and integrated action research should be implemented.
The most effective way of training is the on-the-job training in sawahtechnologies, skills, and knowhow with the international organizations such as
Africa Rice, and national scientists as well as engineers, extension officers, andleading farmers in diverse agro-ecosystems in each country.
As shown in Fig.10, the sawah area expansion has taken long history of
millennium years in Japan. The majority of the other Asian countries also
have developed their sawah systems in historical years of hundreds or more.
Because of extremely rapid expansion of population, we have to find out theway for rapid expansion of sawah systems in Sub-Sahara Africa in a short time,within 50 years or so.

- 197 １９７International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

As shown in Fig. 10, there are two eras of rapid expansion of sawah area inJapan, i.e., during 1500-1650 of the Sengoku era and 1900-1950 of the Meiji
restoration era. About one million ha of sawah area was developed in each of
the period.
The upland rice cultivation rapidly degrades the soil if proper soil and water
conservation measures are not given. This is the important fact in relation to
the second question. If we want to develop soil and water conservation
measures, the sawah system development in lowland should be given priority.
Therefore, if we stress too much on upland rice cultivation, lowland sawah
development will be delayed because of scarce resource allocation for new
sawah development. However, of course when no lowlands are available,
upland rice would be an only selection.
Concerning the third question, if no sawah system exists, three green
revolution technologies, i.e., high yielding varieties, fertilizer, and irrigation, are
not accepted by farmers. The sawah system is the missing prerequisite toaccept the green revolution technologies. This is the main topic of thispresentation, which is described as the Sawah Hypothesis (I).

Iijima:For the integration, although rice is very important, there are many otherimportant crops such as yam and cassava. How can yam and cassava
cultivation be integrated into the lowland sawah systems.

Wakatsuki:

Iijima:Since yam and cassava cultivations are mainly done in the uplands, there
would be no friction with lowland sawah. In some areas like Nupe and Bida,
cassava is grown after rice in the lowlands. In some areas like Abakaliki in thesouth eastern Nigeria, cassava is planted in the upper part of toposequence, andyam is at a lower slope, and rice is cultivated at the valley bottom in awatershed.
Although maize and cassava can be integrated in agro-forestry systems, doyou think that maize and cassava cultivations should be discouraged eventually?

Wakatsuki:
I don’t think so. As I have just mentioned, maize cultivation could degradesoils in the long run if no adequate soil conservation measures are given.
However, concerning the upland rice, I think the upland cultivation should be
discouraged if lowlands are available. If only uplands are available, an upland
NERICA can be grown. In summary, although there may be priority crops
depending on the agro-ecology and environment, we need to implementbalanced research and technological development for improving rice growing
environment such as sawah systems, in comparison with that for improving rice
varieties.

Iijima:Thank you very much.

Sugimoto, Chair:Thanks for your discussion.

- 198 １９８Why was the Green Revolution not Successful in Sub-Sahara Africa?: Sawah (Suiden) Hypothesis (1)Profileⱝ᭶ ฼அ Toshiyuki Wakatsuki㏆␥኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫ㒊ᩍᤵ
Professor, Faculty of Agriculture, Kinki University, Japan
Contact:

Faculty of Agriculture, Kinki University
Nakamachi 3327-204, Nara 631-85051, Japan
Tel: + 81-742-43-9250
Fax: + 81-742-43-9250
Email: wakatuki@ nara.kindai.ac.jp

1977 ᖺி㒔኱Ꮫ኱Ꮫ㝔㎰Ꮫ◊✲⛉༤ኈㄢ⛬ಟ஢䚹1981 ᖺ䛛䜙 2003 ᖺ䜎䛷ᓥ᰿኱Ꮫ䚸䛴䛔䛷 2004 ᖺ
䛛䜙㏆␥኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫ㒊ᩍဨ䚸⌧ᅾ䛻⮳䜛䚹䛣䛾㛫䚸1986 ᖺ 3 ᭶䛛䜙 1989 ᖺ 2 ᭶䜎䛷䚸ᅜ㝿⇕ᖏ㎰ᴗ◊✲ᡤ(IITA)䛷䚸ᅜ㝿༠ຊᶵᵓ(JICA)ὴ㐵䛾㛗ᮇཬ䜃▷ᮇỈ⏣✄సᑓ㛛ᐙ䛸䛧䛶す䜰䝣䝸䜹඲ᇦ䛾✄స⏕ែ䛾ㄪᰝ◊✲䜢ᐇ᪋䚹ཪ䚸す䜰䝣䝸䜹䛻㐺䛧䛯Ỉ⏣䝅䝇䝔䝮䛾ᐇドⓗ◊✲䛻ᚑ஦䚹ᖐᅜᚋ䚸1992 ᖺ䛛䜙⌧ᅾ䜎䛷䚸ᩥ⛉┬䠄᪥ᮏᏛ⾡᣺⯆఍䠅䛾⛉◊䜔 JICA 䛾◊✲༠ຊ䝥䝻䝆䜵䜽䝖➼䛻䜘䜚䚸䝘䜲䝆䜵䝸䜰୰ኸ㒊䛾䝚䝨ேᆅᇦ䛸䜺䞊䝘䛾䜰䝅䝱䞁䝔䜲ᆅᇦ䛾㞟Ỉᇦ䠄ྛ 1 ୓ ha つᶍ䠅䜢䝧䞁䝏䝬䞊䜽䝃䜲䝖䛸䛧䛶䚸ᣢ⥆ྍ⬟䛺Ỉ⏣䝅䝇䝔䝮䛾ᐇドⓗ㛤Ⓨ◊✲䜢ᐇ᪋䛧䛶䛔䜛䚹◊✲䝔䞊䝬䛿す䜰䝣䝸䜹䛻䛚䛡䜛⥳䛾㠉࿨䛾ᐇ⌧䛻䜘䜛㣗ᩱቑ⏘䛸ຎ໬⎔ቃಟ᚟䛾䛯䜑䛾㞟Ỉᇦ⏕ែᕤᏛ䚹ᑓ㛛ศ㔝䛿ᅵተᏛ䚸⏕ែᕤᏛ䚸䜰䝣䝸䜹Ỉ⏣㛤Ⓨศ㔝䛻䛚䛡䜛ᅜ㝿༠ຊ◊✲䚹

Academic career
Professor Toshiyuki Wakatsuki graduated from Post-Graduate School of Kyoto University in 1977.

Professional career
Professor Wakatsuki worked on Sawah (“suiden” in Japanese) based rice culture in West Africa as a
JICA expert at the International Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA), Nigeria, from 1986 to 1989.
Since 1992, Professor Wakatsuki has been funded by JICA, JSPS, FASID and MESIC and hasorganized various long-term on-farm research and development projects at two benchmark watersheds
in Nupe of Central Nigeria, Guinea Savanna zone, and Ashanti in Ghana. His main research field issustainable increase of food production and restoration of degraded environment through ecologicalwatershed engineering in West Africa. Soil science, ecological engineering and African Sawah
development are his professional research fields. Professor Wakatsuki worked as a professor of thefaculty of agriculture, Shimane University, Japan, and has been a professor of the faculty of agriculture,
Kinki University, Japan.

- 199 １
９
９Expansion, Intensification, and Sustainability of Rice Production in West Africa:
The Case of Rainfed Lowland Rice in Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana

す䜰䝣䝸䜹✄స䛾ᣑ኱䚸㞟⣙໬䚸ᣢ⥆ᛶ䠖䝁䞊䝖䝆䝪䝽䞊䝹䛸䜺䞊䝘䛾ኳỈప‵ᆅ✄స䛾౛ 
Expansion, Intensification, and Sustainability of Rice Production in West Africa:
The Case of Rainfed Lowland Rice in Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana㻝Ḉ஭㻌 Ṋྖ

㼀㼍㼗㼑㼟㼔㼕㻌㻿㼍㼗㼡㼞㼍㼕㻌㎰ᯘỈ⏘┬ ㎰ᯘỈ⏘ᨻ⟇◊✲ᡤ ୺௵◊✲ᐁ2
Senior Economist, Policy Research Institute, Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, Japan 2

せ㻌 㻌 ⣙す䜰䝣䝸䜹ㅖᅜ䛾ᨻᗓ䛿䚸ቑ኱䛩䜛䝁䝯䛾㟂せ䛻ᑐฎ䛩䜛䛯䜑䛻䝁䝯䜢ቑ⏘䛧䜘䛖䛸䛧䛶䛔䜛䚹ྠᆅᇦ䛷䝁䝯䛾⏕⏘ᣑ኱䛻኱䛝䛺䝫䝔䞁䝅䝱䝹䜢ᣢ䛴䛾䛿䚸ෆ㝣䛻䛒䜛ప‵ᆅ䠄inland valley lowlands䠅䛷䛒䜛䚹䛭䛣䛷䚸䝁䞊䝖䝆䝪䝽䞊䝹䛾䝤䜰䜿ᕷ䛸䜺䞊䝘䛾䜽䝬䝅ᕷ䛸䛔䛖ෆ㝣䛻䛒䜛 2 䛴䛾኱䛝䛺ၟᴗ㒔ᕷ䛾࿘㎶䛷䚸ప‵ᆅ✄స䛻㛵䛩䜛኱つᶍ䛺ㄪᰝ䜢ᐇ᪋䛧䛯䚹ᮏ✏䛿䚸䛭䛾ㄪᰝ䛾⤖ᯝ䛻ᇶ䛵䛝䚸ప‵ᆅ䛻䛚䛡䜛✄స䛾㠃ⓗᣑ኱䚸⏕⏘ᢏ⾡䛾㞟⣙໬䚸⏕⏘䛾ᣢ⥆ᛶ䚸䛭䜜䛮䜜䛻ᙳ㡪䛩䜛せᅉ䜢᫂䜙䛛䛻䛩䜛䚹ㄪᰝ䛷䛿䚸䜎䛪ᑡ䛺䛟䛸
䜒 1 䞄ᡤ䛿㡿ᇦෆ䛻ప‵ᆅ䛾䛒䜛ᮧ䜢↓సⅭ䛻㑅䜣䛰䚹䛭䛾⤖ᯝ䚸䝤䜰䜿ᕷ࿘㎶ᆅᇦ䛷䛿 157 䞄ᮧ䚸䜽䝬䝅
ᕷ࿘㎶ᆅᇦ䛷䛿 60 䞄ᮧ䛜㑅䜀䜜䛯䚹ㄪᰝᑐ㇟ᮧⴠ䛻䛒䜛ప‵ᆅ䛾ᩘ䛿䚸ྜィ䛩䜛䛸䝤䜰䜿ᕷ࿘㎶ᆅᇦ䛷
317 䞄ᡤ䚸䜽䝬䝅ᕷ࿘㎶ᆅᇦ䛷 60 䞄ᡤ䛻䛾䜌䜛䚹䝤䜰䜿ᕷ࿘㎶ᆅᇦ䛾ప‵ᆅ䛾䛖䛱⣙ 83%䛷䛿䚸௒䜎䛷䛻ᑡ䛺䛟䛸䜒 1 ᅇ䛿✄స䛜⾜䜟䜜䛯䛣䛸䛜䛒䜚䚸⣙37%䛷䛿ㄪᰝ᫬䛻䜒✄䛜᱂ᇵ䛥䜜䛶䛔䛯䚹୍᪉䚸䜽䝬䝅ᕷ࿘㎶䛷䛿䚸䛭䜜䛮䜜⣙ 85%䛸⣙ 57%䛷䛒䜛䚹ከኚ㔞ゎᯒ䛾⤖ᯝ䛻䜘䜛䛸䚸䝤䜰䜿ᕷ࿘㎶ᆅᇦ䛻䛚䛔䛶ప‵ᆅ✄స䛾ᐇ᪋☜⋡䜢㧗䜑䜛せᅉ䛿䚸ᕷሙ䜈䛾㏆᥋ᗘ䛸ேཱྀᅽ䛷䛒䛳䛯䚹䛧䛛䛧䚸䜽䝬䝅ᕷ࿘㎶ᆅᇦ䛷䛿䛭䜜䜙䛿᭷ព䛺ᙳ㡪䜢ᣢ䛯䛪䚸䛭䛾௦䜟䜚⛣Ẹ䛾ᩘ䛜✄సᐇ᪋䛾☜⋡䜢㧗䜑䛶䛔䜛䚹Ỉ⟶⌮䛿䚸ప‵ᆅ䛻䛚䛡䜛✄స䛾㞟⣙໬䛻㠀ᖖ䛻㔜せ䛺ᢏ⾡䛷䛒䜛䚹䛧䛛䛧䚸䜽䝬䝅ᕷ࿘㎶ᆅᇦ䛾ప‵ᆅ䛷䛿䚸✄స䛿䜒䛳䜁䜙ኳỈ䛻౫Ꮡ䛧䛶䛚䜚Ỉ⟶⌮ᢏ⾡䛿᥇⏝䛥䜜䛶䛔䛺䛔䚹୍᪉䚸䝤䜰䜿ᕷ࿘㎶ᆅᇦ䛷䛿䚸㒔ᕷ䛾㏆䛟䛻❧ᆅ䛩䜛ప‵ᆅ䜋䛹␏䜔Ỉ㊰䜢ᵓ⠏䛧䛶Ỉ⟶⌮䜢ᐇ᪋䛩䜛ഴྥ䛻䛒䜛䚹ศᯒ䛾⤖ᯝ䚸␏䜔Ỉ㊰䛾ᵓ⠏䜢ಁ㐍䛩䜛せᅉ䛿䚸ᕷሙ䜈䛾㏆᥋ᗘ䛸⛣Ẹ䛾ᩘ䛷䛒䜛䛣䛸䛜ุ᫂䛧䛯䚹䜎䛯䚸Ỉ㊰䛾䛒䜛ప‵ᆅ䛷䛿ᨺᲠ䛥䜜䛪䛻✄స䛜ᣢ⥆䛧䛶䛔䜛䚹䝤䜰䜿ᕷ࿘㎶ᆅᇦ䛷ከᩘὴ䜢༨䜑䜛Ẹ᪘䛿䝞䜴䝺䚸䜽䝬䝅ᕷ࿘㎶ᆅᇦ䛷䛿䜰䝅䝱䞁䝔䜱䛷䛒䜛䚹୧⪅䛸䜒䜰䜹䞁ㄒ᪘䛻ᒓ䛩䜛䛯䜑䚸ᩥ໬䜔័⩦䛻䛴䛔䛶䛿ඹ㏻Ⅼ䛜ከ䛔䚹୧Ẹ᪘䛻䛸䛳䛶䝁䝯䛿ఏ⤫ⓗ䛺స≀䛷䛿䛺䛔䛯䜑䚸䝤䜰䜿ᕷ࿘㎶䛸䜽䝬䝅ᕷ࿘㎶䛾୧ᆅᇦ䛷✄స䛻ᚑ஦䛧䛶䛔䜛䛾䛿䚸䛯䛔䛶䛔໭㒊䛾䝃䝞䝘ᆅᖏ䛛䜙᮶䛯⛣Ẹ䛷䛒䜛䚹⛣Ẹ䛜ప‵ᆅ䛷✄స䜢䛩䜛⌮⏤䛿䚸⛣ఫ䛩䜛௨๓䛻ప‵ᆅ✄స䛾⤒㦂䛜䛒䜛䛣䛸䚸⛣Ẹ䛻䛿⏿ᆅ䛜㓄ศ䛥䜜䛺䛔ሙྜ䛜䛒䜛䛣䛸䛺䛹䛜䛒䜛䚹䛣䛾䜘䛖䛻୧ᆅᇦ䛷䛿㢮ఝᛶ䛜㧗䛔䛜䚸✄సᢏ⾡䛸䜚䜟䛡Ỉ⟶⌮ᢏ⾡䛾᥇⏝䛿୧ᆅᇦ䛷␗䛺䛳䛶䛔䜛䚹䝤䜰䜿ᕷ࿘㎶ᆅᇦ䛾᪉䛜ᅵᆅ䛾┦ᑐ౯᱁䛜㧗䛔䛣䛸䚸䝤䜰䜿ᕷ࿘㎶ᆅᇦ䛷䛿㐣ཤ䛻ᨻᗓ䜔ᅜ㝿᥼ຓᶵ㛵䛻䜘䜚ᢏ⾡ᬑཬ䛜⾜䜟䜜䛯䛣䛸䛜⌮⏤䛷䛒䜛䛸⪃䛘䜙䜜䜛䚹䛸䜚䜟䛡䚸௒ᅇ䛾ศᯒᑐ㇟䛛䜙䛿㝖䛔䛶䛒䜛䛜䚸䝤䜰䜿ᕷ࿘㎶ᆅᇦෆ䛷ᐇ᪋䛥䜜䛯℺₅Ỉ⏣䝥䝻䝆䜵䜽䝖䛛䜙ᢏ⾡䛜࿘㎶ᆅᇦ䛻ᣑᩓ䛧䛯ྍ⬟ᛶ䛜㧗䛔䚹୍᪉䚸䜽䝬䝅ᕷ࿘㎶ᆅᇦ䛾ᅵᆅᡤ᭷ไᗘ䛿䚸⛣Ẹ䛜ᅵᆅ䛻㛗ᮇⓗ䛺ᢞ㈨䜢䛩䜛䛣䛸䜢ጉ䛢䛶䛔䜛ྍ⬟ᛶ䛜䛒䜛䚹䜻䞊䝽䞊䝗䠖ෆ㝣ప‵ᆅ䚸䝁䝯䚸㞟⣙໬䚸ᅵᆅไᗘ䚸⛣Ẹ

1ᮏㄽᩥࡣࠊ2006 ᖺ 10 ᭶ࡢㅮ₇ෆᐜࢆ㋃ࡲ࠼࡚ࠊෆᐜࢆᣑ኱ࠊⓎᒎࡉࡏࡓࡶࡢ࡛࠶ࡿࠋෆᐜ࡟࠶ࢃࡏ࡚ࠊࢱ࢖ࢺࣝࡶኚ᭦ࡋ࡚࠶ࡿࠋ
This paper is based on the one presented in October 2006, including contents extended and developed. The paper title has been also changed inaccordance with the content modification.
2
2006 ᖺ 10 ᭶ㅮ₇ᙜ᫬ࠋ2010 ᖺ 2 ᭶⌧ᅾࡣ୍ᶫ኱Ꮫ⤒῭◊✲ᡤᩍᤵ䚹At the time of presentation in October 2006. The present title is Professor, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University.

２
０
１

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Expansion, Intensification, and Sustainability of Rice Production in West Africa:
The Case of Rainfed Lowland Rice in Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana㼀㼍㼗㼑㼟㼔㼕㻌㻿㼍㼗㼡㼞㼍㼕㻌
Senior Economist
Policy Research Institute, Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, Japan

Abstract
Governments of West African countries try to enhance rice production to cope with the increasing
demand. Inland valley lowlands constitute a huge potential for rice production. Based onlarge-scale field surveys around two big inland markets in Cô te d’Ivoire (Bouaké ) and Ghana(Kumasi), this paper explores factors affecting the expansion, intensification and sustainability oflowland rice production. We randomly selected villages that have one or more lowlands within thevillage territory. The number of villages selected was 157 around Bouaké and 60 around Kumasi.
We identified 317 lowlands in the Bouaké sample villages and 188 lowlands in the Kumasi sample
villages.
About 83% of Bouaké lowlands were used at least once for rice cultivation, and 37% of total
lowlands were under rice cultivation at the time of study. Corresponding figures for Kumasi were85% and 57%. Multiple regression analyses revealed that market accessibility and populationpressure increased the probability of lowland utilization in the Bouaké area, whereas they had no
significant effect in the Kumasi area. In the Kumasi area, on the other hand, immigrant population
positively influenced the use of lowlands.
Water control is an important technology for intensification of lowland rice production. In the
Kumasi area rice cultivation is purely rainfed, but lowlands located closer to Bouaké tend to beequipped with bunds and canals. Bund and canal construction was found to be influenced
positively by market accessibility and number of immigrants. The adoption of water control
technologies enhanced the sustainability of lowland rice cultivation.
Dominant ethnic groups are Baoulé in Bouaké and Ashanti in Kumasi, both of which belong to
the Akan language group that shares similar cultural heritage. For them rice is not a traditional crop.
Usually, migrants from the Savanna zone are cultivating rice in lowlands because they are familiar
with lowland rice production and they are sometimes not allowed to use upland fields. Hence wewould attribute the differences in rice cultivation methods to the higher relative price of land in the
Bouaké area as well as past governmental and/or foreign intervention. Particularly modern
irrigation projects around Bouaké (which are excluded from our analyses) may have had spill-overeffects of technologies. In addition, we hypothesize that the land tenure systems in the Kumasi area
are discouraging migrant tenant cultivators to make a long-term investment in lowlands.
Keywords: inland valley lowlands, rice, intensification, land tenure, immigrants

1. Introduction
Demand for rice in West Africa has been
growing since the 1970s not only due to population
growth, but also because of a shift in diet away fromtraditional coarse grains caused by a number offactors such as urbanization (Lanç on and Erenstein,2002). Rice production in this region has grown
fast relative to other cereals, but the gap between
regional supply and demand for rice is steadily

increasing. As a result rice imports reached anaverage of 2.6 million tons in the early 1990s(WARDA, 1997). This has raised concern about
the future food security in this region andpolicymakers are taking measures to enhance riceproduction.
Rice production can be increased by area
expansion and/or intensification, i.e. increase inyield per unit area. Rainfed lowland ecology, one- 202 ２０２Expansion, Intensification, and Sustainability of Rice Production in West Africa:
The Case of Rainfed Lowland Rice in Côte d’Ivoire and Ghanaof the five important rice production ecologies inWest Africa,1 is considered to have relatively highpotential for both expansion and intensification.
The lowland ecology occupies an estimated 20
million to 50 million hectares in West Africa, but
only 10 to 25% of the lowland area is undercultivation (WARDA, 1998). Moreover, due tolack of water control, current rice yield in rainfed
lowlands is 1.4 tons per hectare on average.
Because potential yield is estimated to be 2.5 – 5.0
tons per hectare, potential for intensification isenormous (WARDA, 1999).
In spite of the huge potential for expansion andintensification of West Africa’s rainfed lowland
ecology, past studies have been limited to describing
a few cases and no quantitative analysis on arepresentative sample has been done. In order tofill this gap and to generalize the observations toformulate policies, we have conducted surveys onlowlands randomly sampled from a large area andconstructed a representative data set. Based on thisdata set, this paper is to identify quantitatively
factors that determine the use of lowlands for ricecultivation (i.e. expansion), the adoption of water
control technologies (i.e. intensification), and thecontinuation of lowland rice cultivation (i.e.
sustainability).

2. Methods
2.1 Study Sites in Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana
It is generally believed that market accessinfluences the intensification of rainfed lowland riceproduction. Hence, we selected two large inland
cities in West Africa for the study sites in order toexamine the effect of market access. The cities are
Bouaké in the Bandama Valley region of Cô ted’Ivoire and Kumasi in the Ashanti region of Ghana.
They are the second largest cities in each country
with a population of 333,000 in 1988 and 385,000 in1984 respectively.
Both cities have a large,
regional market where locally produced rice as wellas imported rice is being traded. Although bothcities are not prohibitively far from coastal port
cities, local rice should have advantage in terms oftransportation costs over imported rice. In 2001
local rice sold at 250 to 300 FCFA/kg and imported
rice sold at 250 to 600 FCFA/kg in Bouaké ’s retailmarket. Corresponding figures were 2600 to 3200
cedis/kg and 2600 to 6000 cedis/kg in Kumasi’s
retail market (according to our own survey).
Because the exchange rate between FCFA and cedi

was about 1 FCFA = 10 cedis in the same period,
nominal rice prices were almost equivalent in thetwo inland markets. Note that the price of locally
produced rice was the same as the lowest price ofimported rice in those markets.
With respect to agro-ecology, Bouaké is situatedin the transitional zone between the humid forest
and the savanna zones and its annual rainfall isabout 1000mm on average. Kumasi, on the other
hand, is in the humid forest zone with an average of
1400mm annual rainfall. Annual rainfall pattern isbimodal in both areas, but the period of the rainyseason is longer in the Kumasi area. In both areas
rice is mainly produced in lowlands during the rainyseason without modern irrigation technologies, thatis, in rainfed lowland ecology. Upland rice israrely cultivated. Instead uplands are used for yam,maize, and cassava, which are traditional staple
foods. Rice cultivation in lowlands was introducedin these areas relatively recently.

2.2 Sampling in Côte d’Ivoire
In Cô te d' Ivoire we selected 11 contiguous
sub-prefectures around Bouaké . We obtained thevillage list of the 1988 census for each
sub-prefecture from the National Institute of
Statistics in Bouaké , and randomly selected 179
from 857 villages in the list. The number ofvillages sampled in each sub-prefecture wasdetermined so that it would be proportional to thetotal number of villages in each sub-prefecture(sampling rate was about 21 percent). From
December 1999 to May 2001, we visited all the 179
sampled villages several times to collect village
level information on lowland use as well as village
characteristics by means of group interview ofvillage leaders. Out of the 179 sampled villages,
we found that 157 villages had at least one lowland.
These 157 villages were used for the analyses in thispaper.

2.3 Sampling in Ghana
In Ghana we numbered all the villages within the
60km radius from the center of Kumasi on
topographic sheets issued by the Survey Departmentof Ghana. The total number of villages amounted
to 1586. Then 40 villages were randomly drawn
from the villages along the highways, and another40 villages from the villages off the highways. We
visited all of them, and confirmed whether there
were lowlands in the village area. Forty villages- 203 ２０
３International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8were deleted because there were no lowlands in thevillage area. The remaining villages were stratified
based on the distance from the center of Kumasi:
10-20km, 20-40km, and 40-60km.
Then, were-sampled another 20 villages so that there were 12
samples from 10-20km stratum, and 24 samples
from 20-40km stratum and 40-60km stratum
respectively while keeping the numbers of villages
on the highways and off the highways equal. Thisbrought the total number of sample villages to 60(i.e. 30 located along highways and 30 located off
highways).2 We conducted group interviews withthe village leaders to obtain information on thevillage and its lowland areas from September toDecember 2000.

2.4 Data
Table 1 summarizes the variables that weconstructed from the survey data. The number of
immigrants is a critical variable in this study
because it creates population pressure particularly
on lowlands (i.e. effective population pressure) andalso because the immigrants are considered to havebrought lowland rice cultivation in the study sites.
But since we could not obtain reliable information
with respect to the number of immigrants, we usedproxy variables: the ratio of male to female
population in the case of Cô te d’Ivoire and a dummy
variable indicating whether a village is producing
cocoa or not in the case of Ghana. In the Kumasi
area, cocoa farms have been the main providers of
job opportunities for immigrants. In the Bouaké area
there is no such dominating industry, but it isobvious that villages with labor demanding industry
have more males than females due to influx of malelabor force, while villages without such industry
loose males because of their temporal departure forother regions such as cocoa and/or timber zones in
Cô te d’Ivoire.
Because the use of lowland is affected by cultural
background, we use dummy variables for ethnic
group. The majority is Baoulé in the Bouaké area
and Ashanti in the Kumasi area. Both belong to
the Akan language group, and share similar cultural
heritage. In the Kumasi area 56 of 60 sample
villages are Ashanti villages. In the Bouaké area,
there are enough villages that belong to other ethnic
groups than Baoulé , such as Tagbana, Djimini, andDioula. Therefore, in addition to the dummy
variable for Baoulé , one for Tagbana was created.
Ashanti, Baoulé and Tagbana people generally do
not have a tradition to cultivate lowlands.

Whether the village was established by people
from within the region (i.e. the Bandama Valley
region in Cô te d’Ivoire or the Ashanti region in
Ghana) or by people from outside the region
captures some characteristics of the village. In
general, an old village has its origins outside theregion because its founders migrated from otherregions several hundreds years ago. Since then,new villages have been established by separationfrom the original villages. Therefore, relatively
new villages have their origin within the region.
Such new villages sometimes do not have enoughuplands and consequently tend to cultivate in
marginal lands, i.e. lowlands.
With respect to market accessibility, we use
direct distance between the village and the capitalcities, which does not depend on infrastructuredevelopment and does not change over time. The
mode, cost, and time of transportation may be better
indicators for current market access, but we do not
use them because they depend on infrastructuredevelopment and cannot reflect accessibility in thepast.

3. Statistical Analyses
3.1 Use of Lowlands
Of the 179 sample villages, 157 villages haveaccess to lowlands in the Bouaké area, while 40
villages of the 80 villages investigated have accessto lowlands in the Kumasi area. The share ofvillages with lowlands in all sample villages wasmuch higher in the Bouaké area than in the Kumasi
area. The total number of lowlands accessible
from the 157 villages was 317 in the Bouaké area
and it was 188 in the sampled 60 villages in the
Kumasi area, suggesting that the average number oflowlands per village with lowlands was greater inthe latter than the former. However, if we include
villages without access to lowlands, the average
number of lowlands per village becomes 1.8 in the
Bouaké area and 1.6 in the Kumasi area.3 Thismeans that the average number of lowlands pervillage does not differ much between the two study
sites, but the distribution of lowlands is moreskewed in the Kumasi area.
Table 2 compares the use of lowlands in therainy season between the two sites. In the Bouaké
area more than half of the all sample lowlands are- 204 ２０
４Expansion, Intensification, and Sustainability of Rice Production in West Africa:
The Case of Rainfed Lowland Rice in Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana

Table 1

Variables Constructed for Regression Analyses

Variables

Unit

Description

1000

1988 and 1998 census (Côte d’Ivoire). 1984 census and our own
survey as of 2000 (Ghana)

Ratio of male to female%

Male population divided by female population in the village
multiplied by 100. 1988 and 1998 census data are used (Côted’Ivoire only)

Cocoa producing village

dummy

If the village produces cocoa, the value is 1 (Ghana only)

Akan

dummy

If the dominant ethnic group in the village is Baoulé (Côte d’Ivoire)or Ashanti (Ghana), the value is 1

Tagbanadummy

If the dominant ethnic group in the village is Tagbana, the value is
1 (Côte d’Ivoire only)

Origin of the village

dummy

If the ancestors came from outside the region (the Bandama
Valley region in Côte d’Ivoire or the Ashanti region in Ghana), thevalue is 1

Hamlets of ethnic minorities

dummy

If ethnic minorities form hamlets in the village, the value is 1

Existence of primary schooldummy

If a primary school had been established in the village as of 1980,the value is 1

Years since the establishment

years

Number of years since the establishment of the first primaryschool in the village

Regional capital

km

Distance to the village from Bouaké in Côte d’Ivoire and Kumasi in
Ghana

Sub-prefectural capital

km

Distance from the sub-prefectural capital to the village. There are
11 sub-prefectural capitals (Côte d’Ivoire only)

Village along a highway

dummy

If the village is located along a highway, the value is 1. There are
6 highways from Kumasi (Ghana only)

Access to the village

kmDistance from the lowland to the village center

Acreage of lowland area

100m2

Estimated acreage of lowland area (Côte d’Ivoire only)

Permanent stream

dummy

If the water source is a permanent stream, the value is 1 (Côted’Ivoire only)

Seasonal stream

dummy

If the water source is a seasonal stream, the value is 1 (Côted’Ivoire only)

Village Level Variables
Village population
Immigrant indicators

Dominant ethnic group

Education at village level

Access to the Markets

Lowland Level Variables

Water source- 205 ２０
５International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Table 2Current Lowland Use in Rainy Season (% of number of lowland)
No useRice

Vegetables

Maize

Tree
Plantation

Rice +
Vegetable

Rice +
Maize

Rice + Tree
Plantation

Bouaké area

59.3

36.6

13.3

0.6

1.9

9.8

0.3

0.3

Kumasi area

18.3

56.6

11.8

11.7

59.0

3.5

4.4

39.0

Total number of lowlands is 317 in the Bouaké area and 188 in the Kumasi area. The percentages do not add up to 100% for each sites
because of multiple use. In the case of the Kumasi area, the original figures obtained from the survey data are corrected based on theweight of each sampling stratum shown in footnote 2.

Table 3 Current Lowland Use in Dry Season (% of number of lowland)
No useRice

Vegetable

Maize

Tree
Plantation

Rice +
Vegetable

Rice +
Maize

Rice + Tree
Plantation

Bouaké area

88.6

4.1

7.3

0.9

1.9

0

0.3

0

Kumasi area

6.4

0

71.1

57.3

59.0

0

0

0

Total number of lowlands is 317 in the Bouaké area and 188 in the Kumasi area. The percentages do not add up to 100% for each sites
because of multiple use. In the case of the Kumasi area, the original figures obtained from the survey data are corrected based on theweight of each sampling stratum shown in footnote 2.

Table 4Expansion and Reduction of Rice Cultivation (% of number of lowland)
Rice has never beencultivated

Rice was cultivatedin the past

Average years passed
since last rice cultivation

Rice is currently cultivated(i.e. at the time of this study)

Bouaké area

17.4

46.0

15.5 years

36.6

Kumasi area

14.6

28.5

12.7 years

56.6

Total number of lowlands is 317 in the Bouaké area and 188 in the Kumasi area. In the case of the Kumasi area, the original figuresobtained from the survey data are corrected based on the weight of each sampling stratum shown in footnote 2.

not currently utilized (i.e. at the time of study), andrice cultivation is the single dominant use in therainy season. On the other hand, in the Kumasi
area more than 80 percent of the lowlands are
currently utilized: the major crop in the rainy season
is rice while tree plantation is the major perennial
use of lowlands. Palm trees were planted in almost
all the cases of tree plantation, and teak and cocoa
trees were observed in a few cases. In about 40
percent of the lowlands both rice and trees weregrown. Rice is sometimes intercropped with trees
while they are still small, but otherwise rice andtrees are planted separately. In the Bouaké area,
palm, teak, and cocoa trees are planted mainly on
uplands.
In the dry season, no rice is grown at both sites
except for a few lowlands equipped with modern
irrigation facilities in the Bouaké area as shown in
Table 3. In the Kumasi area the second rainyseason in the bimodal rainfall pattern, or so-called
minor season, is considered part of the dry season.
Hence, most of the lowlands profit from theadditional rainfall to grow vegetables and maize inthe dry season. This does not mean that rice in therainy season and vegetables and maize in the dry
season are cropped on the same plot in a rotation.
Rather, those crops usually occupy different plots
within the same lowland. On the other hand, since
the Bouaké area has less rainfall, almost 90 percentof the lowlands are not cropped during the dry
season.

3.2 Expansion of Rice Cultivation
Lowland without water control can be classified
as “marginal land” because the profitability oflowland rice production may not be as high as crop
production on uplands such as maize considering- 206 ２０
６Expansion, Intensification, and Sustainability of Rice Production in West Africa:
The Case of Rainfed Lowland Rice in Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana

high labor input for lowland rice production.4
Therefore, with respect to the expansion of lowland
rice cultivation, hypothesis 1 is that populationpressure reduces the availability of upland, andhence induces the utilization of lowlands, andhypothesis 2 is that immigrants who are often notallowed to use uplands tend to cultivate lowlands.
As shown in Table 4, there are several lowlands
that have never been used for rice cultivation, andthe share of such lowlands is 17.4% in the Bouaké
area and 14.6% in the Kumasi area. By analyzing
factors that distinguish lowlands utilized at least
once for rice cultivation and those never utilized, we
can identify the determinants of the expansion of
lowland rice cultivation. Hence, a binary dummy
variable for “utilized lowland” is used as thedependent variable: lowlands utilized at least once
take the value of 1, while lowlands never utilized
take the value of 0. Note that the explanatory
variables used in the regressions are either time

Table 5invariant (e.g. distance to the regional capital) or
predetermined in the past (e.g. existence of a
primary school as of 1980) because in the analyses
on the expansion we are concerned with decisions
made in the past.
Table 5 presents the regression results. Village
population had a positive, significant effect in the
Bouaké area, and cocoa production, proxy for
immigrants, had a positive, significant effect in the
Kumasi area. Therefore, hypothesis 1 is supported
in the Bouaké area, while hypothesis 2 is supported
in the Kumasi area. Distance from Bouaké had anegative effect, which suggests that lowland ricecultivation has been disseminated from the capital,
either informally or formally through extension
agency, and/or market access may have promoted
the expansion of rice cultivation. But in the
Kumasi area distance to Kumasi had no significant
effect.

Determinants of Utilization of Lowlands for Rice Cultivation1

Explanatory Variables

Bouaké

Kumasi

++

0

0
na

na
+++

--0
-0

na
na
++
0
0

0
na

0
na
0

+
0

0
na

0
0
+++
0.16
2
304
249
0.85

na
na
0

Village Level Variables
Village population as of 1988 / 1984
Immigrant indicators
Ratio of male to female population as of 1988
Cocoa producing village
Dominant ethnic group in the village
Akan
TagbanaOrigin of the village is outside
Ethnic minorities live in hamlets
Existence of primary school as of 1980
Location of the village
Distance to regional capital
Distance to sub-prefectural capital
Village on highways
Lowland Level Variables
Distance from village center
Acreage of lowland area
Water Source
Permanent stream
Seasonal stream
Constant
Pseudo R squared
Total number of sample lowlands
Number of lowlands ever utilized for rice cultivation
Fraction of correct predictions

3

187
158
0.84

+ (-), + + (- -), and + + + (- - -) indicate that the coefficient is estimated to be positive (negative) at significance level 10%,5%, and 1% respectively. 0 indicates the coefficient is not statistically significant at the 10% level.
1

Dependent variable is binary dummy, whose value is unity if the lowland was utilized for rice cultivation at the time ofthis study or in the past, and zero otherwise. Probit model was used to estimate the coefficients, but only signs ofcoefficients are presented in the table. Regression results are available from the author upon request.

2

Thirteen lowlands with modern dam irrigation facilities are excluded from the 317 lowlands identified.

3

Total number of sample lowlands in Ghana is 188, but one lowland was dropped due to missing information.

- 207 ２０
７International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

3.3 Intensification of Rice Cultivation
The single most important biophysical constraint
to lowland development is lack of water control.
Therefore, water control is the critical intensification
technology for lowland rice production.
Inaddition, with improved water management,
subsequent intensification becomes possible, i.e. it
may no longer be too risky for farmers to use
external inputs, such as fertilizer. Based on thisconsideration, we focused on the adoption of water
control technologies at lowland level as an indicatorof intensification of rice cultivation in lowlands. In
the Bouaké area a significant number of lowlands
were equipped with bunds and canals. But wefound no lowland with water control technologies in
the Kumasi area.
Table 6 shows that, in the Bouaké area, 13
lowlands, or 4.1%, of 317 total sample lowlands areequipped with modern dam irrigation facilities withcanals and bunds. Except for these lowlands, rice
is grown under rainfed conditions. Of all sample
lowlands, about 71% have no water control
technologies (Table 6). Bunds are more frequently
adopted than canals, implying that in some cases
farmers create bunds without canals. If we take
into account only lowlands under cultivation, theshare of lowlands without water control becomes
43% of 129 lowlands. This means that lowlands
without water control technologies tend to beabandoned more frequently than those with water
control technologies. On the other hand, lowlands
with modern irrigation facilities have not beenabandoned, though the irrigation is not necessarily
fully functioning.
According to Boserup (1965), populationpressure causes intensification of agricultural
production.
In the same line, the induced
innovation theory predicts that intensification should
be induced by high price of land relative to that oflabor (Hayami and Ruttan, 1985).
Therefore,
hypothesis 3 is that higher population induces
intensification, if the population increases demand
for lowlands as well as supply of labor force. Notethat this is the case where land is scarce andconsequently population pressure cannot cause an
expansion but rather induce an intensification. On
the other hand, because water control technologies
are not indigenous in the study sites, they may havebeen disseminated from the cities. In addition,market accessibility increases profitability of riceproduction and consequently enhances theprobability of the technology adoption. Hence,

hypothesis 4 is that the distance from the markets
has a negative effect on technology adoption.
Table 7 shows the results of Probit analyses on
the determinants of the adoption of water control
technologies in the Bouaké area. The regressions
are done for bunds and water supply canals
simultaneously by bivariate Probit method since theadoption of these technologies should be correlated.
In fact, 37 of the lowlands have both bunds andwater supply canals. First, the ratio of malepopulation has a positive significant effect on bothbunds and canals. Since this is an indicator of
immigrant population, the results support the
hypothesis 3.
On the other hand, village
population has no significant effect on the adoptionof bunds and canals.
This suggests that
intensification is induced not simply by increased
population, but rather by increased lowland users
and labor force, or “effective population pressure”
as indicated by the ratio male to female population.
Second, the distance to capital cities reduces theprobability of the adoption of water control
technologies, as expected. That is, hypothesis 4 is
supported.

3.4 Economic Sustainability of Rice
Cultivation
As shown in Table 4, the share of lowlands neverutilized for rice cultivation is higher in the Bouaké
area than in the Kumasi area, but the difference is
not so large as that for rice cultivation at the time of
study (‘ current cultivation’). This indicates that inabout 85% of the lowlands, rice cultivation has been
attempted in both sites but rice cultivation was more
frequently abandoned in the Bouaké area. Table 4
also shows that the average number of years since
rice was cultivated last is greater in the Bouaké area
than in the Kumasi area (15.5 years and 12.7 years
respectively), but they do not differ very much.
With respect to sustainability, this study concerns
sustainability at lowland level, not at plot level. In
the Kumasi area, plot level sustainability of lowland
rice cultivation is not an issue, since most farmers
are practicing shifting rice cultivation with several
years of fallow. The issue we are concerned withhere is continuous use of lowlands for ricecultivation.
This is more like economic
sustainability because it depends on profitability ofrice production.
Based on this definition,
sustainability of rice cultivation at lowland level ismeasured by (1) current use of lowland for ricecultivation, and (2) the number of years since rice

- 208 ２０８Expansion, Intensification, and Sustainability of Rice Production in West Africa:
The Case of Rainfed Lowland Rice in Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana

Table 6Adoption of Water Control Technologies (% of number of lowland)
Modern dam
irrigation

Rainfed lowlands(without modern irrigation)
No water control
technologies

Bunds

Supply canalDrain canal

Bunds + both
canalsBouaké area
All the lowlands

4.1

70.7

23.3

13.6

6.6

3.8

Bouaké area
Lowlands under ricecultivation

10.1

43.4

45.0

27.9

11.6

7.0

0

100

0

0

0

0

Kumasi area

Total number of lowlands is 317 in the Bouaké area and 188 in the Kumasi area. Number of lowlands currently under ricecultivation is 129 in the Bouaké area. The percentages do not add up to 100% because of adoption of several technologies.

Table 7

Determinants of Adoption of Water Control Technologies in the Bouaké area1

Explanatory Variables

Bunds

Canals

0

0

++

++

--0
0
0
+

--0
0
+++
0

0
---

----

0
0

0
0

+
+++
0

0
+++
0

Village Level Variables
Village population as of 1988
Immigrant indicators
Ratio of male to female population as of 1988
Dominant ethnic group in the village
Akan
TagbanaOrigin of the village is outside
Ethnic minorities live in hamlets
Existence of primary school as of 1980
Access to the village
Distance to regional capital
Distance to sub-prefectural capital
Lowland Level Variables
Distance from village center to lowland
Acreage of lowland area
Water Source
Permanent stream
Seasonal stream
Constant
Correlation in the residuals
Pseudo R squared3
Number of lowlands ever utilized for rice cultivation
Number of lowlands with water control technologies
3
Fraction of correct predictions

++
0.13
2
249
74
0.73

0.23
2
249
43
0.86

+ (-), + + (- -), and + + + (- - -) indicate that the coefficient is estimated to be positive (negative) at significance level
10%, 5%, and 1% respectively. 0 indicates the coefficient is not statistically significant at the 10% level.
1

Dependent variable is binary dummy, whose value is unity if the lowland has adopted water control technologies(bunds and water supply canals), and zero otherwise. Bivariate Probit model is used to estimate the coefficients,
but only signs of coefficients are presented in the table. Regression results are available from the author uponrequest.

2

Thirteen lowlands irrigated by modern dam irrigation are excluded from the analyses.

3

Based on single-equation Probit estimation.

- 209 ２０９International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

was last cultivated in the lowland. For the firstmeasure, a binary dummy variable is created with avalue of 1 for lowlands currently under ricecultivation, and a value of 0 for lowlands where rice
was grown at least once in the past but where ricecultivation was abandoned, i.e. where rice was notgrown at the time of study. By the second measure,if rice was present at the time of study, the numberof years is 0. If rice has been abandoned, the more
years have passed since rice was cultivated last, theless sustainable cultivation will be. Hence, thismeasures rather “non-sustainability.” Note thateven if rice is not cultivated in a lowland at the timeof study, it does not mean that the lowland wasabandoned permanently.
But it would bereasonable to assume that the longer the period of
non-utilization since the last rice cultivation, thecloser to permanent abandonment, although wecannot foresee when they will resume ricecultivation. Therefore, we will use the two kindsof indicator of sustainability.
We assume that when rice cultivation was
attempted, the decision was rational and hence therice cultivation was expected to be profitable at leastin the short run. But after a while, rice cultivation
was abandoned due to some changes in theeconomic environment that made rice production
unprofitable. There could be two reasons for this:one is a lower rice price, and the other is a higher
labor cost. The lower rice price might be due tolower import price reflecting the lower world priceand/or lower price of local rice due to successful
irrigation projects. The higher labor cost could bea result of stagnation of population growth in thevillage or migration.
Hence, with respect tosustainability of lowland rice cultivation, we
postulate the following hypotheses: hypothesis 5 isthat distance from the market has a negative effecton sustainability because high transportation costs
make it impossible for local rainfed lowland rice tocompete with cheap rice in the market; hypothesis 6
is that immigrants have a positive effect onsustainability because they supply cheap labor force;and hypothesis 7 is that lowlands with water control
technologies are more sustainable because of higher
efficiency.5
Table 8 presents the results of Probit regressions
to explain the sustainability measured by the current
use, and Table 9 presents the results of Tobit
regressions to explain the “non-sustainability”
measured by years since the last rice cultivation.
First, the distance to the markets has no significant
effect in the Kumasi area, but it has unexpected

signs in the Bouaké area. Hence, hypothesis 5 isrejected. Second, in the Bouaké area village
population increases the sustainability measured bycurrent use as shown in Table 8, but the male tofemale ratio has no significant effect onsustainability as shown in Tables 8 and 9. On theother hand, in the Kumasi area, lowland ricecultivation in cocoa producing villages tends to be
more sustainable in both measures. The results
support hypothesis 6 for the Kumasi area, but the
support is partial for the Bouaké area. Third, in the
Bouaké area the adoption of bunds and canals
increases the probability of sustainable ricecultivation in lowlands, which renders a support tohypothesis 7. As already shown in Table 7, theadoption is significantly influenced by access to themarket and male population, but those variables do
not appear to have significant effect in Tables 8 and
9.
Therefore, market access and effective
population pressure enhance the sustainability ofrice cultivation, but their effects may not be direct,
but rather through the investment in water control
technologies. In sum, sustainability of lowland ricecultivation depends on water control technologies
which are affected by male population and market
access in the Bouaké area, while it depends on
migrant population for cocoa plantation in Kumasi
area which has no relationship with the distance tomarket.

4. Discussions
We found that in both Bouaké and Kumasi areas,
rice cultivation was attempted in more than 80% of
the total lowlands in the past. The expansion was
induced by population pressure.
But thesustainability of lowland rice cultivation differs in
the two sites. In the Bouaké area some of thelowlands have adopted water control technologies,
and rice cultivation in such lowlands tends to be
more sustainable than those without water control.
As a result, a number of lowlands that failed toadopt water control technologies have beenabandoned. On the other hand, in the Kumasi area,
no lowland has adopted water control technologies,
and sustainability does not depend on thetechnologies.
Surprisingly, however, morelowlands are under sustained utilization in the
Kumasi area than in the Bouaké area. That is,while in the Kumasi area lowland rice cultivation ismore extended and more sustainable, in the Bouaké
area lowland rice cultivation is more concentrated tolowlands with water control technologies.

- 210 ２１０Expansion, Intensification, and Sustainability of Rice Production in West Africa:
The Case of Rainfed Lowland Rice in Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana

Table 8Determinants of Sustainability of Rice Cultivation (current use of lowland)1

Explanatory Variables

Bouaké

Kumasi

+++

0

0
na

na
++

+++
+++
0
0
0

na
na
-0
++

0
+
na

0
na
0

+++
+++
0
++

na
na
0
na

0
0
--0.35
2
249
103
0.79

na
na
-0.10
158
97
0.65

Village Level Variables
Village population as of 1998 / 2000
Immigrant indicators
Ratio of male to female population as of 1998
Cocoa producing village
Dominant ethnic group in the village
Akan
TagbanaOrigin of the village is outside
Ethnic minorities live in hamlets
Number of years since establishment of primary school
Access to the village
Distance to regional capital
Distance to sub-prefectural capital
Village on highways
Lowland Level Variables
Water control technologies in lowland
Bunds
Canals (for water supply)Distance from village center to lowland
Acreage of lowland area
Water source
Permanent stream
Seasonal stream
Constant
Pseudo R squared
Number of lowlands ever utilized for rice cultivation
Number of lowlands currently being cultivated
Fraction of correct predictions+ (-), + + (- -), and + + + (- - -) indicate that the coefficient is estimated to be positive (negative) at significance level
10%, 5%, and 1% respectively. 0 indicates the coefficient is not statistically significant at the 10% level.
1

Dependent variable is a binary dummy, whose value is unity if the lowland is currently being utilized for ricecultivation (i.e. at the time of this study), and zero otherwise. Probit model is used to estimate the coefficients,
but only signs of coefficients are presented in the table. Regression results are available from the author uponrequest.

2

Thirteen lowlands irrigated by modern dam irrigation are excluded from the analyses.

Thus, the first question is why lowland ricecultivation in the Kumasi area is more sustainable
than that in the Bouaké area. As Table 5 shows,lowland rice cultivation in the Kumasi area does notdepend on the distance to Kumasi, the regional
market.
This does not mean that the riceproduction in the Kumasi area is only for
self-consumption. Rather, most of their production
is sold in the market. But most of the transaction
takes place at the millers in local towns (Furuya and
Sakurai (2005) and Sakurai, Furuya, and Futakuchi(2006)). Rice producers bring paddy to local
millers and mill the paddy. Then, they sell themilled rice to rice traders who come to purchasemilled rice. They resell it in the bigger market like
Kumasi. The number of millers has increased inrecent years according to our own survey on millers.

It implies that milled rice transaction at local millers
is profitable for producers, millers, and traders. On
the other hand, in the Bouaké area, lowland riceproduction depends on the distance to the city
market. This indicates that transportation cost is
too high for rice producers in remote areas.
Current output/input price ratio suggests that theprice of rice might be so high in the Kumasi areathat it gives a good incentive for producers. As
mentioned above, the retail price of milled local ricein the Bouaké market is about 250 – 300 FCFA/kg,
and that in the Kumasi market is about 2600 – 3200
cedis/kg. On the other hand, standard daily wage
for agricultural labor is 1000 FCFA/day in the
Bouaké area and 6000 cedis/day in the Kumasi area.
Hence, 1 kg of milled rice costs 0.25 – 0.30 day
work and 0.43 – 0.53 day work respectively. That

- 211 ２１
１International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Table 9Determinants of Non-Sustainability of Rice Cultivation(number of years of fallow)1

Explanatory Variables

Bouaké

Kumasi

0

0

0
na

na
--

----0
0
0

na
na
0
0
0

--0
na

0
na
0

----0
0

na
na
0
na

0
0
+++
0.07
2
247
144

na
na
0
0.05
3
145
45

Village Level Variables
Village population as of 1998 / 2000
Immigrant indicators
Ratio of male to female population as of 1998
Cocoa producing village
Dominant ethnic group in the village
Akan
TagbanaOrigin of the village is outside
Ethnic minorities live in hamlets
Number of years since establishment of primary school
Access to the village
Distance to regional capital
Distance to sub-prefectural capital
Village on highways
Lowland Level Variables
Water control technologies in lowland
Bunds
Canals (for water supply)Distance from village center to lowland
Acreage of lowland area
Water source
Permanent stream
Seasonal stream
Constant
Pseudo R squared
Number of lowlands ever utilized for rice cultivation
Number of lowlands currently NOT being cultivated+ (-), + + (- -), and + + + (- - -) indicate that the coefficient is estimated to be positive (negative) at significancelevel 10%, 5%, and 1% respectively. 0 indicates the coefficient is not statistically significant at the 10% level.
1

Dependent variable is number of years since last rice cultivation. If a lowland is currently cultivated to rice,
the number of years is zero, otherwise it is a positive number. Tobit model is used to estimate thecoefficients to take into account the significant number of cases of zero in the dependent variable. Only
signs of coefficients are presented in the table. Regression results are available from the author uponrequest.

2

Two lowlands are dropped from 249 lowlands due to missing information.
modern dam irrigation are excluded from the analysis.

3

Thirteen lowlands are dropped from 158 lowlands due to missing information.

is, rice is more expensive in the Kumasi area.
Because labor is the major input for rice production,
this high price of rice can explain why lowland riceproduction in the Kumasi area is more sustainable atthis moment.
As for intensification, even though the“non-intensive” system in the Kumasi area may be
profitable enough, it does not explain why lowland
rice cultivation in the Kumasi area has not been
intensified at all. Some intensification will bring alarger harvest, which is likely to result in a larger
profit under higher price of rice. We may havethree explanations, which are not mutually exclusive,
for “non-intensification” in the Kumasi area.6

Thirteen lowlands irrigated byFirst, intensification is, as already discussed,
affected by the relative factor price. Average rental
cost of one hectare of lowland is 41,000 FCFA
(standard deviation is 20,000) in the Bouaké areaand 177,000 cedis (standard deviation is 144,000) in
the Kumasi area according to our own survey.
Although the standard deviations are very large, theratio of rental cost to daily wage is 41 days/ha and30 days/ha respectively. This implies that theextensive land use continues in the Kumasi area
because land is relatively cheap. This is consistent
with our casual observation in the Kumasi area
where lowlands are so abundant that cultivators arestill able to shift their plot every year.

- 212 ２
１
２Expansion, Intensification, and Sustainability of Rice Production in West Africa:
The Case of Rainfed Lowland Rice in Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana

The relative price can explain why theintensification is sustainable in the Bouaké area, but
it does not explain why it was technically possible
for them to adopt intensification technologies
because water control technologies were notindigenous. Therefore, the second explanation
concerns interventions that have taken place in thepast.
In fact, during the 1970s, massiveinterventions took place in Cô te d’Ivoire through thecreation of a state agency for rice development, i.e.
SODERIZ (Socié té de Dé veloppement de la
Riziculture), as well as foreign aid particularly from
Taiwan (Le Roy, 1998; Wakatsuki, 2000). Out of
317 sample lowlands in the Bouaké area, 13
lowlands are irrigated by modern dam irrigation
facilities, while in the Kumasi sample there is no
dam irrigation site.7
Not only water control
technologies such as bunds and canals, but also
improved rice varieties and transplantation
technology are considered to have been spilled-overfrom the irrigation project sites to rainfed lowlands.
Finally, the third explanation is from theviewpoint of land tenure systems. In the Kumasi
area, tenancy contract is usually valid only for one
year, and therefore tenant cultivators have to make a
new contract every year. This encourages ricecultivators to shift their plots every year, andconsequently discourages investment in land to use
the same plot continuously. On the other hand, inthe Bouaké area, tenancy contract is less strict andhence usually no duration is specified at the time ofcontract. In this case, investment in water control
technologies is safer and could be more encouraged
than in the Kumasi area. The difference in land
tenure systems in the two sites may be caused byhistorical factors, particularly by the plantation of
cash tree crops such as cocoa and palm in the
Kumasi area. Because investment in land by tree
planting enhances land ownership rights (Besley,1995), migrants usually are not allowed to plant
trees. Investment in water control technologies
may be regarded on a similar footing as tree
planting.

cultivation in the Kumasi area. But no water
control technologies have been adopted there: ricecultivation is purely rainfed. On the other hand, inthe Bouaké area, the expansion seems to have been
driven by population pressure, but the sustainability
depends on the adoption of water control
technologies. That is, inefficient rice production
does not last. Since bund and canal construction is
influenced positively by the accessibility to themarket and number of immigrants, lowlands locatedcloser to Bouaké tend to have water control
technologies.
Comparing the two study sites, we showed thatthe difference in rice cultivation methods could be
attributed to: (1) higher relative price of land in the
Bouaké area, (2) past governmental and/or foreignintervention in the Bouaké area, and (3) land tenuresystems in the Kumasi area. Modern irrigation
projects around Bouaké (which are excluded from
our analyses) may have had spill-over effects oftechnologies. This suggests that, although therelatively high price of land is a necessary condition
for intensification, intensification will not take place‘ automatically’, i.e. it needs a push, through theintroduction and dissemination of technologies.

Footnote
1

The five ecologies for rice cultivation are irrigatedlowland, rainfed lowland, rainfed upland,
mangrove, and deep-water (Dalton and Guei,
2003).

2

The sampling rate for each stratum is summarized
in the table at the end. The number of villages
along the highways is much lower than that ofvillages off the highways. But because we
assumed a priori that whether a village is locatedalong or off the highways should be an importantfactor affecting market access and consequently
lowland rice cultivation, we sampled the two typesof villages equally so that we would be able toexamine the effect of market access.

3

As noted in the text, half of the 80 villages initiallysampled have no accessible lowland. Therefore,
assuming that half of the 60 sample villages haveaccess to lowlands, the average number oflowlands is estimated as 188/(60+ 60).

4

Lowland rice production is generally considered tobe less profitable than upland cropping such asmaize. But this needs to be formally verified.
We are currently collecting plot level data of

5. Conclusions
This paper explores the factors affecting the
expansion, intensification, and sustainability oflowland rice production around two large inlandmarkets in Cô te d’Ivoire (Bouaké ) and Ghana(Kumasi). The analyses reveal that immigrant
population is the most significant determinant of the
expansion and sustainability of lowland rice

- 213 ２
１
３

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8lowland rice and upland maize production so that
we will be able to compare their profitability.
5

Sakurai (2006) showed that rice production in
rainfed lowland is more profitable with partial
water control technologies such as supply canals
than without them. He used data collected fromlowlands in the city of Bouaké wheretransportation costs to the market can be ignored.

6

Because there is no lowland with water control
technologies in the Kumasi area, the three
explanations cannot be statistically tested,
unfortunately.

7

In the Kumasi area, we found only one
dam-irrigated paddy field developed with
Taiwanese aid, but it was not included in our
sample.

References
Besley, T., 1995. Property Rights and Investment
Incentives: Theory and Evidence from Ghana. J.
Pol. Econ., 103(5): 903-937.
Boserup, E., 1965. The Conditions of Agricultural
Growth: The Economics of Agrarian Change
under Population Pressure. George Allen and
Unwin, London, UK.
Dalton, T.J. and Guei, R.G., 2003. Productivity
Gains from Rice Genetic Enhancements in West
Africa: Countries and Ecologies. World
Development, 30(2): 359-374.
Furuya, J. and T. Sakurai, 2005. Capacity Utilizationof Rice Milling Industry and Interlinkage in the
Rice Market in Ghana. Japanese Journal of Rural
Economics, 7: 88-99.
Hayami, Y. and Ruttan V.W., 1985. Agricultural
Development: An International Perspective.
Johns Hopkins University Press, Baltimore, MD.
Lanç on, F. and Erenstein, O., 2002. Potential andProspects for Rice Production in West Africa.

Paper Presented at Sub-Regional Workshop on“Harmonization of Policies and Co-ordination of
Programmes on Rice in the ECOWAS
Sub-Region.” Accra, Ghana, 25-28 February
2002.
Le Roy, X ., 1998. Le Riz de la Ville et le Riz desChamps: La Riziculture Ivoirienne Sacrifié e à la
Paix Sociale à Abidjan. In: A. Cheneau-Loquay
and A. Leplaindeur (editors), Les Riziculture del’Afrique de l’Ouest – Actes du ColloqueInternational CNRS-CIRAD, Bordeuax 5-7 avril
1995. Centre de Coopé ration Internationale en
Recherche Agronomique pour le Dé veloppement,
Montpellier, France.
Sakurai, T., 2006. Intensification of Rainfed
Lowland Rice Production in West Africa: Present
Status and Potential Green Revolution.
Developing Economies, X LIV(2): 232-251.
Sakurai, T., J. Furuya, and K. Futakuchi, 2006.
Effect of Industrial Cluster on Efficiency andProduct Q uality: The Case of Rice Milling
Industry in Ghana. In: Y. Sawada and T. Sonobe(editors), Market and Economic Development,
Toyokeizai Shinpo-sha, Tokyo (in Japanese).
Wakatsuki, T., 1999. Experience of Economic
Development in Asia and Its Application to
Africa: Comparison and Evaluation of Rice
Production Development Projects in West
African Countries. Foundation for Advanced
Studies in International Development, Tokyo,
Japan (in Japanese).
WARDA, 1997. Annual Report 1997. West Africa
Rice Development Association, Bouaké , Cô ted’Ivoire.
WARDA, 1998. Annual Report 1998. West Africa
Rice Development Association, Bouaké , Cô ted’Ivoire.
WARDA, 1999. Mid-Term Plan 2000-2002. West
Africa Rice Development Association, Bouaké ,Cô te d’Ivoire.

Along the highways
Stratum

Total number ofvillages

Off the highways

Number of sample
villages

Total number ofvillages

Number of sample
villages

10 – 20 km

356(17.4%)

138

6 (4.3%)20 – 40 km

114

12

(10.5%)

534

12 (2.2%)

40 – 60 km

106

12

(11.3%)

564

12 (2.1%)

Total

255

30

(11.8%)

1236

30 (2.4%)- 214 ２
１
４

Expansion, Intensification, and Sustainability of Rice Production in West Africa:
The Case of Rainfed Lowland Rice in Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana

7th ICCAE Open Forum
Nagoya University
October 20, 2006

Intensification of Rainfed Lowland Rice Production
and Potential Green Revolution

Takeshi Sakurai

Policy Research Institute
Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries

Rice in West Africa• Increasing demand• 6 % per year since 1973
• 8 million tons per year recent years• because of population growth and urbanization• Increasing gap between supply-demand• production growth: 5.1%
• Import: 2.8 million tons in 1998
• heavy burden on trade balances• How to enhance regional rice production?

- 215 ２
１
５

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Enhancing Rice Production in West Africa• Area expansion (extensification)• Upland is limited since fallow period is required• Vast lowland area remains uncultivated• 10 – 25% of total area is under cultivation• Yield increase (intensification)• Modern irrigation facilities are too costly• Low potential of yield increase in upland ecology• There is a room for intensification in lowland
ecology• Water control technology (canal and bund)• High yielding varieties are already available• Chemical fertilizer is more effective in lowland

Questions• What factors influence• Area expansion of lowland rice production• Intensification of lowland rice production• Is there potential Green Revolution of rice in West
Africa?
• Water control technologies• Rice modern varieties• Their impact on rice yield- 216 ２
１
６

Expansion, Intensification, and Sustainability of Rice Production in West Africa:
The Case of Rainfed Lowland Rice in Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana

Water Control Technologies in Rainfed Lowland

Without water control technologies

With bunds and canals

Study Site•

Bandama Valley region, central Côte
d’Ivoire•

Transitional zone with 1100 mm
precipitation
•
•
•
•
•
•

•

Bouaké, the second largest city, islocated••No cocoa or coffee
No cotton
Yam is traditional staple foodFew upland rice
Some lowland rice
Irrigation/lowland development project
during the 1970s

Ideal for looking at the effect of market
access

179 villages are randomly selected from
11 sub-prefectures (21% of total villages)
Source: CIA World Factbook- 217 ２１
７International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Staple Food in the Surveyed Villages㻿㼔㼍㼞㼑㻌㼛㼒㻌㻿㼠㼍㼜㼘㼑㻌㻲㼛㼛㼐㻌㻯㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚
㻝㻚㻜㻜
㻿㼔㼍㼞㼑

㻜㻚㻤㻜

㼞㼕㼏㼑
㼥㼍㼙
㼙㼍㼕㼦㼑
㼏㼍㼟㼟㼍㼢㼍

㻜㻚㻢㻜
㻜㻚㻠㻜

㻰㼑㼏

㻺㼛㼢

㻻㼏㼠

㻿㼑㼜

㻭㼡㼓

㻶㼡㼘

㻶㼡㼚

㻹㼍㼥

㻭㼜㼞

㻹㼍㼞

㻲㼑㼎

㻜㻚㻜㻜

㻶㼍㼚

㻜㻚㻞㻜

㻹㼛㼚㼠㼔

Production of rice is very few or zero in most villages.
People purchase rice for consumption even in rural villages.

Distribution of Sample Villages- 218 ２
１
８

Expansion, Intensification, and Sustainability of Rice Production in West Africa:
The Case of Rainfed Lowland Rice in Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana

Current Situation

Source: Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan

Data Collection• Village/Lowland survey• Randomly sampled 179 villages• All the accessible lowlands from the villages(317 lowlands were identified)• Rice cultivator survey• 64 cultivators in the city of Bouaké• No difference in terms of market access• All the corresponding land owners- 219 ２１
９

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8Market Access and Prices
In Bouaké

Average of 179
villages

Distance from
Bouaké

0 km

46 km

Sale Price ofPaddy

128 F/kg

79 F/kg

Purchase Price ofChemicalFertilizer

240 F/kg

289 F/kg

Paddy/Fertilizer
Price Ratio

0.53

0.27

Village/Lowland Survey• Total number of lowlands䠖
• With irrigation facilities• Without irrigation facilities317
13 (excluded)304• Out of 304 lowlands without irrigation• Rice was cultivated at least once
249
• Determinants of rice cultivation are identified by Probit regression- 220 ２２０Expansion, Intensification, and Sustainability of Rice Production in West Africa:
The Case of Rainfed Lowland Rice in Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana

Determinants of Utilization of Lowland for Rice Production
Explanatory Variables2
Village Level Variables
Village Population
Population density

0.01 (0.00)* * *Population growth rate

-0.01 (0.08)

Immigrant indicators
Percentage of immigrants in total population
Percentage of male in female population

0.01 (0.02)-0.02 (0.01)* * *Population Density +Paddy/Fert. Price+

Access to city+

Dominant ethnic group in the village
Baoulé

-1.98 (0.42)* * *Tagbana-1.20 (0.54)* *Primary school
Market access0.00 (0.01)

Price ratio of paddy and fertilizer

2.86 (1.27)* *Distance to sub-prefectural capital-0.03 (0.01)* *Lowland Level Variables
Distance from village center

0.05 (0.04)

Acreage of lowland area

0.00 (0.00)

Water Source
Permanent stream

0.48 (0.38)

Seasonal stream

0.12 (0.29)
3.45 (0.81)* * *Constant
Total number of sample lowlands

3043

Number of lowlands ever utilized for rice cultivation

249

Fraction of correct predictions

0.84

Table 2

Determinants of Lowland Rice Expansion• Higher population density leads the use oflowland area for rice cultivation(due to the scarcity of upland area)• It is not immigrants but population pressurethat induces the use of lowland area
• Closeness to city is a positive factor forlowland rice cultivation• technology is disseminated from the city
• favorable output price due to transportation cost

- 221 ２２
１International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Village/Lowland Survey:
Water Control• Lowlands ever utilized for rice cultivation: 249• With bunds:• With irrigation canals:

74 (29.7%)
43 (17.3%)• Determinants of the adoption of water control are
identified by Probit regression

Determinants of Adoption of Water Control Technologies
Explanatory Variables

Bunds

Canals-0.00 (0.00)-0.00 (0.00)

0.01 (0.08)

0.02 (0.12)

0.05 (0.04)

0.10 (0.04)* *Village Level Variables
Village Population
Population density
Population growth rate
Immigrant indicators
Percentage of immigrants in total population
Percentage of male to female population
Dominant ethnic group in the village
Baoulé

0.02 (0.01)* * *0.01 (0.01)* *-1.09 (0.34)* * *Tagbana
Primary school-0.31 (0.56)
0.01 (0.01)-0.69 (0.38)*
0.12 (0.78)
0.02 (0.01)*

Price ratio of paddy and fertilizer

3.07 (1.17)* * *4.50 (1.30)* * *Distance to sub-prefectural capital-0.04 (0.02)* * *-0.04 (0.02)*

Distance from village center
Acreage of lowland area
Water Source-0.05 (0.04)
0.00 (0.00)

0.02 (0.04)
0.01 (0.00)

Permanent stream
Seasonal stream

0.61 (0.38)
1.22 (0.36)* * *1.90 (0.07)* * *-2.58 (0.78)* * *-4.46 (1.03)* * *Male Population+

Paddy/Fert. Price+

Access to city+

Market access

Lowland Level Variables

Constant
Number of lowlands ever utilized for rice cultivation
Number of lowlands with water control technologies
Fraction of correct predictions

3

249
74
0.76

- 222 ２
２
２-0.09 (0.55)

2493
43
0.87

Table 4

Expansion, Intensification, and Sustainability of Rice Production in West Africa:
The Case of Rainfed Lowland Rice in Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana

Determinants of Water Control Technologies• Immigrants promote water control
technologies• Effective population pressure• Technology is brought by immigrants• Population density and population growth
have no effect on the technology adoption• Lowland is not a scarce resource• Closeness to the city is again a positive factorof the technology adoption

Rice Cultivator Survey in Bouaké:
Water Control• Total number of sample cultivators• Bunds• Irrigation canals

62 cultivators
42 cultivators• Much higher adoption rates than in rural areas- 223 ２
２
３64

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Rice Cultivator Survey in Bouaké:Land Ownership and Cultivator’s Status
Combinations of Rice Cultivator and Land Owner in Bouaké1)
Type ofIndigene

Indigene

Immi

Land

(inherited(inherited

grant

Ownersfromfrom otherfather)than

Statusfather)2)of RicePublic or

Owner/Cultivator
Indigene

IndigeneImmi(inherited(inherited

grant

from

from otherfather)than father)㸱)institution
al owner4)

Cultivators
Immigrants

13

19

11

NA

NA

1

10

1

4

0

1

2

NA

1

㸦total 54㸧
Indigenes㸦total 9㸧
1)
Numbers in the table are the number of rice cultivators that fall in each combination. The number of rice cultivatorsinterviewed is 64, but one has been dropped due to missing information.
2)
Out of 23 cases, 15 are the case of inheritance from an uncle on the mother’s side.
3)
The two are the case of inheritance form an uncle on the mother’s side.
4)
This includes land owned by city government, land inside a military camp, and land owned by public/privatecompanies.

Rice Cultivator Survey in Bouaké: Land Tenure• Determinants of the adoption of irrigation canals are
identified by Probit regression• Market access and population pressure are assumed to be equal in
the sample• Effect of land tenure security is focused• Proxied by• Cultivator’s status: immigrants or indigenes• Type of land ownership in the case of immigrant cultivator• Indigenous communal land (inherited from relatives)• Indigenous individualized land (inherited from father)• Institutional land (public or private firms)• Immigrants• Immigrants cultivator’s land tenure security is low at the beginning• If investment enhances the security, the cultivator is willing to invest inland relative to otherwise• In the case of communal land and immigrant’s land

- 224 ２
２
４Expansion, Intensification, and Sustainability of Rice Production in West Africa:
The Case of Rainfed Lowland Rice in Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana

Determinants of Adoption of Water Control Technologies
Determinants of Water Supply Canals and Modern Varieties at Cultivator Level
Explanatory Variables

Dummy for Cultivatorswith Water Supply
Canals Probit Model

Cultivator’s status (dummy variable):
Immigrants cultivators
Type of landownership (dummy variables):Immigrants* Indigenous communal
Immigrants* Indigenous individualized
Immigrants* Public/Institutional
Cultivator’s characteristics:
Age (10–2)
Sex (1 = male, 0 = female)Years of schooling
Living in own house (= 1, otherwise 0)
Years of rice cultivation experience
Plot characteristics:
Water source is permanent stream
Water source is seasonal stream
Water source is pond
Distance from water source (1,000 m)
Walking time from the residence (100 min)Acreage of the plot (ha)Constant
Fraction of correct prediction
No. of positive observations
No. of observations†2.78 (1.29)* *- Use rights are weakrelative to the case of indigenes- Less secure0.41 (0.80))–3.12 (1.14)* * *–3.25 (1.13)* * *0.44 (2.56)
0.43 (1.00)–0.02 (0.07)–0.64 (0.58)–0.11 (0.05)* *0.50 (0.99)
1.47 (0.71)* *–0.94 (0.98)–0.06 (0.24)–0.02 (0.01)* *2.36 (1.87)
0.65 (1.78)
0.84
42
63

- Ownership is strong
relative to other cases- Fewer room to enhance the use rights

Table 6

Rice Cultivator Survey in Bouaké: Rice Varieties• Unknown varieties are classified as early modern varieties (MV)as they were adopted many years ago and have been
continuously cultivated without renewal• Determinants of the adoption of recent modern varieties (MV)are identified by Probit regression- 225 ２２
５

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Determinants of Adoption of Rice Modern Varieties
Determinants of Water Supply Canals and Modern Varieties at Cultivator Level
Explanatory Variables

Dummy for Cultivators
with“Recent MV”
Probit Model

Land tenure has no effectCultivator’s status (dummy variable):
Immigrants cultivators
Type of landownership (dummy variables):Immigrants* Indigenous communal
Immigrants* Indigenous individualized
Immigrants* Public/Institutional
Cultivator’s characteristics:
Age (10–2)
Sex (1 = male, 0 = female)Years of schooling
Living in own house (= 1, otherwise 0)
Years of rice cultivation experience
Plot characteristics:
Water source is permanent stream
Water source is seasonal stream
Water source is pond
Distance from water source (1,000 m)
Walking time from the residence (100 min)Acreage of the plot (ha)Constant
Fraction of correct prediction
No. of positive observations
No. of observations†2.38 (1.47)–1.99 (1.37)–1.12 (1.30)–0.72 (1.19)

Male cultivator +–1.52 (2.89)
3.35 (1.59)* *–0.18 (0.11)
2.02 (0.97)* *–0.08 (0.06)

House owner (wealth) +0.03 (1.13)–0.80 (1.00)–5.33 (2.21)* *3.16 (1.82)*
0.99 (0.77)
4.43 (2.57)*–2.30 (1.88)
0.86
50
63

Table 6

Factor Payments by Water Control and Rice Varieties
With Water Supply Canal
Recent MV

Early MV

Without Water Supply Canal
Recent MV

Early MV

Plot Size (ha)0.35 (0.24)

0.26 (0.15)

0.32 (0.18)

0.30 (0.05)

Yield of Paddy (kg/ha)

3633 (2112)

2896 (1310)

2770 (1340)

2454 (2080)

Seed17.4 (11.9)

15.0 (6.3)

14.3 (8.5)

12.6 (4.8)

NPK

7.4 (16.6)

0.6 (1.7)

11.5 (18.3)

1.3 (2.5)

Urea

11.5 (18.7)

3.4 (7.9)

10.3 (12.1)

5.0 (10.0)

Herbicide

9.0 (10.5)

1.1 (3.0)

17.8 (16.1)

9.4 (12.0)

Insecticide

2.4 (5.3)

0.4 (1.2)

1.2 (3.6)

1.6 (3.1)

Family Labor

299 (215)

307 (159)

291 (241)

128 (83.3)

Hired Labor

104 (90.9)

86.5 (111)132 (166)

124 (111)

Total Variable Costs (103 FCFA/ha)

451 (244)414 (144)

479 (276)

281 (104)

Value of Output (103 FCFA/ha)

454 (264)

362 (164)346 (168)

307 (260)

Residual (103 FCFA/ha)

3.5 (235)-52 (124)-133 (302)25.2 (218)

Unit Costs (FCFA/kg of paddy)

144 (84.0)

153 (51.2)

220 (188)

123 (70.9)

Number of Cultivators

32

8

17

4

Variable Input Costs (103 FCFA/ha)

The yields do not differ significantly.
The uses of chemical fertilizer differ significantly: higher in the case of recent MV
The residuals are not significantly different from zero.

Table 8- 226 ２
２
６

Expansion, Intensification, and Sustainability of Rice Production in West Africa:
The Case of Rainfed Lowland Rice in Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana

Rice Cultivator Survey in Bouaké:
Fertilizer Use and Yield• 33 out of 64 cultivators use no chemical fertilizer• Average use (urea + NPK) for 31 cultivators: 146 kg/ha (SD=138)• Average use (urea + NPK) for all cultivators: 69kg/ha (SD=118)• According to WARDA’s on-farm trial under partial water control• 100 kg urea per ha is recommended• Yield: 2.6 t/ha (SD=1.4) without fertilizer• Yield: 3.9 t/ha (SD=0.9) with recommended fertilizer• This much fertilizer makes more profit, given the current prices• This yield level is quite similar to the results of the Bouaké survey

Effect of Irrigation and Modern Varieties on Fertilizer Use
Effects of Technology Adoption on Fertilizer Use and Yield at Cultivator Level
Explanatory Variables

2SLS Model
Chem Fertilizer Use (kg/ha)

Water supply canals (endogenous)
Use of recent MVs (endogenous)
Cultivator’s characteristics:
Age
Sex (1 = male, 0 = female)Years of schooling
Living in own house (= 1, otherwise 0)
Years of rice cultivation experience
Plot characteristics:
Water source is permanent stream
Water source is seasonal stream
Water source is pond
Distance from water source (100 m)
Acreage of the plot (ha)Constant
R2
No. of observations†16.1 (53.0)
53.8 (38.5)–2.88 (0.83)* * *48.7 (48.9) *–5.04 (2.73)*
116 (39.8)* * *1.54 (1.36)

Neither irrigation nor
modern variety influences
the amount of chemicalfertilizer use

House owner (wealth) has
a positive effect–119 (62.5)* )–116 (61.1)*–179 (79.2)* *–0.30 (0.78)–16.6 (49.8)
166 (64.7)* *0.41
63Table 9- 227 ２２
７International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Effect of Irrigation and Modern Varieties on Yield
Effects of Technology Adoption on Fertilizer Use and Yield at Cultivator Level
Explanatory Variables

2SLS Model
Yield (kg/ha)

Water supply canals (endogenous)
Use of recent MVs (endogenous)
Cultivator’s characteristics:
Age
Sex (1 = male, 0 = female)Years of schooling
Living in own house (= 1, otherwise 0)
Years of rice cultivation experience
Plot characteristics:
Water source is permanent stream
Water source is seasonal stream
Water source is pond
Distance from water source (100 m)
Acreage of the plot (ha)Constant
R2
No. of observations†1340 (730)*
201 (1030)–15.3 (21.9)
1200 (640)*
4.71 (63.1)–139 (510)51.5 (32.4)

Canal increases yield
Modern varieties have no significant
effect on yield–241 (803)–1110 (634)*–1330 (941)
10.9 (17.1)–3550 (1120)* * *2900 (1060)* * *0.34
63Table 9

Summary of Findings•

Rice cultivation in lowland tends to be induced by•••

Water control technologies are adopted due to
•
•
•

•

Immigrant population
Market access
Tenure security as well as potential enhancement of security

Adoption of rice modern varieties is affected by several factors, among which:••Population pressure
Market access

Relatively wealthy cultivators seem to have adopted them through purchase

Half of the sample cultivators put no chemical fertilizer••

If they use, the amount is good enough
Relatively wealthy cultivators tend to use chemical fertilizer•

Water control technologies enhance rice yield, while new modern varieties have noeffect on rice yield•

Rice production in lowlands is not so profitable even in the city of Bouaké••

Modern varieties without water control is less profitable than with water control due tolower yieldIn rural areas it may be less profitable due to lower paddy/fertilizer price ratio- 228 ２２８Expansion, Intensification, and Sustainability of Rice Production in West Africa:
The Case of Rainfed Lowland Rice in Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana

Conclusions• Despite of potential land tenure problem andliquidity/credit constraints, the average yield in thecity of Bouaké is comparable with Asian countries likethe Philippines.
• For realizing a Green Revolution, investment in water
control technologies in rainfed lowland and further
improvement of modern varieties are necessary.
• Although there are vast areas of lowlands in rural area
where potential of a Green Revolution exists, poor
infrastructure makes rice production less profitable
and limits area expansion and intensification.

MERCI- 229 ２２
９

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8ឋွࣖሉ
3WGUVKQP CPF #PUYGT 5GUUKQPす䜰䝣䝸䜹䛻䛚䛡䜛ప‵ᆅ✄స䛾㞟⣙໬䛸⥳䛾㠉࿨䛾ྍ⬟ᛶIntensification of Rainfed Lowland Rice Production and Potential Green RevolutionḈ஭㻌 Ṋྖ㻌 㻌 Takeshi Sakurai㎰ᯘỈ⏘┬ ㎰ᯘỈ⏘ᨻ⟇◊✲ᡤ ୺௵◊✲ᐁ *Senior Economist, Policy Research Institute, Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries, Japan*ྖ఍䠖㻌 ᮡᮏ㻌 ඘㑥㻌 Chair person: Mitsukuni Sugimotoྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫᅜ㝿ᩍ⫱༠ຊ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊㻌 ෸ᩍᤵ
Associate Professor, ICCAE, Nagoya Universityᮡᮏ 䠄ྖ఍䠅䠖Thank you very much for your presentation.

Dr. Sakurai has mentioned about theland tenure problems and how the African people can accelerate the adoption of
NERICA varieties.
ᑠᒣ䠖

Are there any questions?

⣽䛛䛔㉁ၥ䛷ᜍ⦰䛷䛩䛜䚸⛣Ẹ䛾ᙺ๭䚸⛣Ẹ䛸䛔䛖せ௳䛜䛛䛺䜚ᢏ⾡ᑟධ䛻ຠ䛔䛶䛔䜛䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䛷䛧䛯䛜䚸⛣Ẹ䛸䛿䛹䛾䜘䛖䛺ᐃ⩏䜢䛥䜜䛶䛔䜛䛾䛷䛧䜗䛖䛛䚹⛣Ẹ䛿䛔䛴䜎䛷⤒䛳䛶䜒⛣Ẹ䛺䛾䛛䚸䛭䜜䛸䜒ఱ௦䛛⤒䛶䜀⛣Ẹ䛷䛿䛺䛟䛺䜛䛾䛷䛧䜗䛖䛛䚸䛭䛖䛔䛖 transitional 䛺䛣䛸䜢ศᯒ䛥䜜䛶䛔䜛䛾䛷䛿䛺䛔䛛䛸䛔䛖Ẽ䛜䛩䜛䛾䛷䛩䛜䚸䛭䛾㎶䛿䛔䛛䛜䛷䛧䜗䛖䛛䠛Ḉ஭䠖௒䝤䜰䜿࿘㎶䛻ఫ䜣䛷䛔䜛 Baoulé 䛾ே䚻䛿 2䡚300 ᖺ䛠䜙䛔๓䛻䜺䞊䝘䛛䜙᮶䛯䛾䛷⛣Ẹ䛷䛩䛜䚸ᙼ䜙⮬㌟䛿䜒䛖ᆅඖ䛾ே㛫䛰䛸ᙉ䛟ព㆑䛧䛶䛔䛶䚸⮬ศ䛯䛱䛾ᅵᆅ䛷䛒䜛䛸䛔䛳䛶ᶒ฼䜢୺ᙇ䛧䛶䛔䜎䛩䚹䛭䜜䛻ᑐ䛧䛶ㄡ䜒䜽䝺䞊䝮䛩䜛ே䛿䛔䜎䛫䜣䛛䜙䚸䛭䜜䛿䛭䛖䛺䛾䛷䛧䜗䛖䚹䛭䛖䛩䜛䛸䛭䛾ᅵᆅ䛿 Baoulé 䛾ᅵᆅ䛷䛒䜛䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䛻䛺䛳䛶䛔䛶䚸Baoulé 䛜䝁䞁䝖䝻䞊䝹䛧䛶䛔䜛䜟䛡䛷䛩䚹Baoulé 䛻ᒓ䛥䛺䛔Ẹ᪘䛾⛣Ẹ䛿䝣䝷䞁䝇᳜Ẹᆅ᫬௦䛻ጞ䜎䛳䛯䛣䛸䛷䛧䜗䛖䛛䜙䚸䛫䛔䛬䛔ᩘୡ௦䛧䛛⤒䛳䛶䛔䜎䛫䜣䚹Ẹ᪘䛾ᐃ⩏䛛䜙ゝ䛘䜀䚸Baoulé 䛷䛺䛡䜜䜀䛔䛴䜎䛷⤒䛳䛶䜒⛣Ẹ䛿⛣Ẹ䛷䛩䚹⤖፧䛸䛛䚸㛗䛟ఫ䜣䛷䛔䛶 Baoulé 䛾ゝⴥ䛜䛧䜓䜉䜜䜛䜘䛖䛻䛺䜛䛺䛹䛧䛶䚸䛔䛴䛾㛫䛻䛛ᆅඖẸ໬䛩䜛ே䜒䛔䜛䛛䜒䛧䜜䜎䛫䜣䚹䛧䛛䛧䚸䛔䛟䜙㛗䛟ఫ䜣䛷䛔䛶䜒⛣Ẹ䛾ᏊᏞ䛷䛒䜜䜀䚸䛭䛾ᅵᆅ䛻ᑐ䛩䜛⏕ᚓⓗ䛺ᶒ฼䛿⏕䛨䜎䛫䜣䛛䜙䚸䛭䛖䛔䛖ព࿡䛷䛿⛣Ẹ䛛⛣Ẹ䛷䛺䛔䛛䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䛿ᙼ䜙⮬㌟䛾ㄆ㆑䛾୰䛷䜽䝸䜰*䛻ศ䛛䜜䛶䛔䜛䛸ᛮ䛔䜎䛩䚹䛭䜜䛜୍᫬ⓗ䛺䜒䛾䛺䛾䛛䚸䛭䜜䛸䜒ᮍ᮶Ọຕ䛻⥆䛟

2006 ᖺ 10 ᭶ㅮ₇ᙜ᫬䚹2010 ᖺ 2 ᭶⌧ᅾ䛿୍ᶫ኱Ꮫ⤒῭◊✲ᡤᩍᤵ䚹At the time of presentation in October 2006. The present title is Professor, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University.

- 230 ２３０Expansion, Intensification, and Sustainability of Rice Production in West Africa:
The Case of Rainfed Lowland Rice in Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana䛛䛹䛖䛛䛿䜟䛛䜚䜎䛫䜣䛜䚸⌧≧䛾ศᯒ䜢䛩䜛䛻䛒䛯䛳䛶䛿䛭䛾䜘䛖䛺ᙧ䛷༑ศ䛰䛸ᛮ䛔䜎䛩䚹
ὸ἟䠖

government 䛜䜔䛳䛝䛻䛺䛳䛶䜒䚸䜎䜟䜚䛾㎰ᐙ䛜䜔䛳䛝䛻䛺䛳䛶䜒䚸䛺䛛䛺䛛ᗈ䛜䜙䛺䛔䛸䛔䛖䛾䛜᭱ᚋ䛾⤖ㄽ䛾䜘䛖䛷䛩䛜䚸ఱ䛜㎰Ẹ䛻䛸䛳䛶䜲䞁䝉䞁䝔䜱䝤䛺䛾䛛䚸Ḉ஭䛥䜣䛾◊✲䛾䛺䛛䛛䜙ศ䛛䜛䛣䛸䛿䛒䜛䛷䛧䜗䛖䛛䠛Ḉ஭᫂䜙䛛䛻䝬䞊䜿䝑䝖䛻㏆䛔䛸䛣䜝䛷䛿ᢏ⾡䛿ᬑཬ䛧䚸᥇⏝䛥䜜䛶䛔䜎䛩䛧䚸✄సᆅ䜒ᗈ䛜䛳䛶䛔䜛䜟䛡䛷䛩䚹ᮏ᪥䛿✄స䛾ヰ䛰䛡䜢䛧䜎䛧䛯䛜䚸㔝⳯స䜚䛺䛹䜒ᕷሙ䛻㏆䛔ᡤ䛷䛿㠀ᖖ䛻ᣑ኱䛧䛶䛔䜎䛩䚹䛣䜜䛿 government 䛜ᬑཬ䛧䛶䛔䜛䜟䛡䛷䛿䛺䛟⮬ศ㐩䛷䜔䛳䛶䛔䜛䛾䛷䛩䛛䜙⤒῭ⓗ䜲䞁䝉䞁䝔䜱䝤䛿㠀ᖖ䛻኱䛝䛔䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䛷䛩䚹㻌 㻌 ୍᪉䛷䚸ᢏ⾡ⓗ䛺᝟ሗ䛜ఱ䜒䛺䛟䚸ప‵ᆅ䛷✄స䜢䛩䜛䛣䛸䛻㛵䛧䛶ఱ䜒䜰䜲䝕䜰䜢ᣢ䛳䛶䛔䛺䛔ே㐩䜢ᨺ䛳䛶䛚䛔䛶䜒຾ᡭ䛻✄స䜢ጞ䜑䜛䛛䛸䛔䛖䛸䚸䜔䛿䜚䛭䛖䛔䛳䛯䛣䛸䛿䛺䛔䜟䛡䛷䛩䚹䛭䛣䛻⤒㦂䛾䛒䜛⛣Ẹ䛜᮶䜛䛸䛛䚸௒᪥䛿䛒䜎䜚ᙉㄪ䛧䜎䛫䜣䛷䛧䛯䛜 government 䛾ᬑཬဨ䛜᮶䜛䛸䛔䛳䛯䛝䛳䛛䛡䛜ᚲせ䛷䛩䚹䝁䞊䝖䝆䝪䝽䞊䝹䛷䛿䚸government 䛜䛛䛴䛶ప‵ᆅ䛷䛾✄స䜢ᬑཬ䛥䛫䛯᫬௦䛜䛒䜚䜎䛩䚹௒᪥䛾ヰ䛿䛭䛖䛔䛖άື䛜 90 ᖺ௦ึ䜑䛻඲㒊⤊䜟䛳䛶䛧䜎䛳䛶 10 ᖺ௨ୖ⤒䛳䛯≧ែ䛷䛹䛖䛺䛳䛶䛔䜛䛛䛸䛔䛖ヰ䛷䛩䚹௒䛿 300 䛔䛟䛴䛛䛾ప‵ᆅ䛾䛖䛱 100 䛔䛟䛴䛧䛛✄స䜢䛧䛶䛔䜎䛫䜣䛜䚸䛛䛴䛶䛿 200 䛛ᡤ௨ୖ䛷✄స䜢䛧䛶䛔䛯᫬ᮇ䛜䛒䜚䜎䛧䛯䚹䛺䛬䛛䛸䛔䛖䛸 government 䛜౯᱁䜢⟶⌮䛧䛶䛔䛶⡿䛾౯᱁䛜㠀ᖖ䛻㧗䛛䛳䛯䛯䜑䛷䛩䚹䛭䛾䛣䜝䛿✄స䛾ᬑཬ䜒ᨻᗓ䛜⾜䛳䛶䛔䜎䛧䛯䚹䛭䛾ᚋ䚸ᵓ㐀ㄪᩚᨻ⟇䛾䛯䜑䚸౯᱁䜈䛾௓ධ䜢Ṇ䜑䛶䛧䜎䛔䚸ᬑཬ䜒䛒䜎䜚䜔䜙䛺䛟䛺䛳䛯䛯䜑䚸ప‵ᆅ䛷䛾✄స䛜䛰䜣䛰䜣⦰ᑠ䛧䛶䛧䜎䛔䜎䛧䛯䚹䛭䛖䛩䜛䛸 government 䛜䜔䛳䛯䛣䛸䛿ᬑཬ䛻䛸䛳䛶඲↛ព࿡䛜䛺䛛䛳䛯䜟䛡䛷䛿䛺䛔䛡䜜䛹䜒䚸ᬑཬ䛥䛫䛯ᢏ⾡䛻ᣢ⥆ᛶ䛜䛒䜛䛛䛹䛖䛛䛸䛔䛖䛸䛣䜝䛷䛿⤒῭ⓗ䛺ၥ㢟䛜୍␒኱䛝䛔䛾䛷䛿䛺䛔䛛䛸ᛮ
䛔䜎䛩䚹

㣤ᔱ䠖

ྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ䛾㣤ᔱ䛷䛩䚹⣽䛛䛔䛣䛸䛷ᜍ⦰䛷䛩䛜䚸⫧ᩱ䜢ᢞධ䛧䛯ሙྜ䛸ᢞධ䛧䛺䛔ሙྜ䛾཰㔞䛜㠀ᖖ䛻㐪䛳䛶䛔䜛䛾䛻⯆࿡䜢ᣢ䛱䜎䛧䛶䚸ඛ䜋䛹䛾䝇䝷䜲䝗䛾୰䛷⫧ᩱ䜢ᢞධ䛧䛯ሙྜ 3.9 䝖䞁䚸ᢞධ䛧䛺䛔ሙྜ 2.6 䝖䞁䛾ᖹᆒ཰㔞䛜ᚓ䜙䜜䜛䛸䛒䜚䜎䛧䛯䛜䚸䛣䜜䛿䛚䜘䛭 1.5 ಸ䛟䜙䛔䛾཰㔞䛜ฟ䛶䛔䜛䛣䛸䛻䛺䜚䜎䛩䚹⫧ᩱ䜢ᢞධ䛧䛶䛔䜛᫬䛿Ỉ䜢୚䛘䛯䜚䛔䜝䛔䜝䛺䛣䛸䜢䜔䛳䛶䛔䜎䛩䛾䛷䚸䝖䞊䝍䝹䛾฼┈䛸䛧䛶䛿䛹䜜䛠䜙䛔䜰䝑䝥䛧䛶䛔䜛䛸䜏䛶䜘䜝䛧䛔䛷䛧䜗䛖䛛䠛Ḉ஭䠖䛣䜜䛿⚾䛜䜔䛳䛯ヨ㦂䛷䛿䛺䛟䛶䚸WARDA 䛾◊✲⪅䛜 on farm 䛷⾜䛳䛯ヨ㦂䛷䛩䚹ྠ䛨 partial water control 䛾ప‵ᆅ䛷䜔䛳䛶䛔䜎䛩䛾䛷䚸Ỉ䛻㛵䛧䛶䛿᮲௳䛜- 231 ２
３
１

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8ྠ䛨䛷䚸⫧ᩱ䛾㐪䛔䛾䜏䛷䛣䜜䛰䛡཰㔞䛾㐪䛔䛜ฟ䛶䛔䜛䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䛰䛸ᛮ䛔䜎䛩䚹✄స䛾฼₶䜒ィ⟬䛧䛶䛔䜎䛧䛶䚸⚾䛿ᩘᏐ䛿ぬ䛘䛶䛔䜎䛫䜣䛜䚸⫧ᩱ䛸䛧䛶 100 䜻䝻䛾ᒀ⣲䜢ධ䜜䛶䛣䜜䛰䛡䛾཰㔞䛻䛺䛳䛯䛸䛝䛻䚸ᙜ᫬䛾⫧ᩱ䛸⡿䛾౯᱁䛻ᇶ䛵䛔䛶ィ⟬䛩䜛䛺䜙䜀฼┈䛿༑ศ㧗䛔䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䛻䛺䛳䛶䛔䜎䛧䛯䚹⫧ᩱ䜢ධ䜜䜛ປຊ䛿䛯䛔䛧䛯䛣䛸䛒䜚䜎䛫䜣䛾䛷䚸ປാ᫬㛫䛻㛵䛧䛶䛿䜋䛸䜣䛹ྠ䛨䛷䚸⫧ᩱ䛾䝁䝇䝖䛾㐪䛔䛰䛡䛷䛧䜗䛖䛛䜙䚸༢⣧䛻䛔䛘䜀䚸཰㔞䛾ቑ䛘䛯ศ䜢㔠㢠䛻᥮⟬䛧䛶䚸䛭䛣䛛䜙⫧ᩱ䛾䝁䝇䝖䜢ᘬ䛔䛯䛰䛡฼┈䛜ቑ䛘䛶䛔䜛䛸䛔䛘䜎䛩䚹㣤ᔱ䠖䛭䛖䛧䜎䛩䛸䚸⫧ᩱ䜢ᢞධ䛧䛶ዡບရ✀䜢᱂ᇵ䛩䜛䛣䛸䛷䚸༑ศవศ䛾฼┈䛿䛒䛜䜛䛸⪃䛘䛶䜘䜝䛧䛔䛷䛧䜗䛖䛛䚹Ḉ஭䠖䛿䛔䚹䛯䛰䛧䚸䛣䜜䛿 1 ᖺ䛰䛡䛾ヨ㦂䛷䛩䚹partial water control 䛜䛹䜜䛟䜙䛔᭷ຠ䛛䜟䛛䜚䜎䛫䜣䛜䚸㝆Ỉ㔞䛾ẖᖺ䛾ኚື䛜䛒䜚䜎䛩䛾䛷䚸⫧ᩱ䜢ධ䜜䛶䜒㞵䛜ᑡ䛺䛔ᖺ䛻䛿㥏┠䛻䛺䜛䛸䛔䛖䝸䝇䜽䜒䛒䜚䜎䛩䚹༢⣧䛻ẖᖺ䛣䜜䛰䛡䛾㐪䛔䛜䛒䜛䛛䛹䛖䛛䛿䜟䛛䜙䛺䛔䛸ᛮ䛔䜎䛩䚹䛭䜜䛸䜒䛖୍䛴䛻䛿䚸⚾䛜⾜䛳䛯ู䛾◊✲䛻♧䛧䜎䛧䛯䛡䜜䛹䜒䚸⫧ᩱ䜢㈙䛖䛻㝿䛧䛶䜽䝺䝆䝑䝖䛺䛹䛿䛒䜚䜎䛫䜣䛾䛷䚸䜻䝱䝑䝅䝳䛜䛒䜛ே䛿㈙䛘䜛䛜↓䛔ே䛿㈙䛘䜎䛫䜣䚹㝆Ỉ㔞䛜ከ䛔䛣䛸䛜ุ䛳䛶䛔䛯䛸䛧䛶䜒ⓙ䛜⫧ᩱ䜢㈙䛖䛛䛸䛔䛖䛸䚸௒䛾ᕷሙ⤒῭䛾䝯䜹䝙䝈䝮䛷䛿䛺䛛䛺䛛䛭䛖䛿䛔䛝䜎䛫䜣䚹䜒䛱䜝䜣䚸䛰䛛䜙䛸䛔䛳䛶⚾䛿⫧ᩱ䛻⿵ຓ㔠䜢ฟ䛫䛸䛔䛖㆟ㄽ䛿䛒䜎䜚䛧䛺䛔䛾䛷䛩䛜䚸⿵ຓ㔠䛷䛿䛺䛟䜽䝺䝆䝑䝖䜢౪୚䛩䜛䛻䛧䛶䜒䚸೉㔠䜢䛧䛶䜒᪭㨧䛻䛺䜛䛸㏉
䛫䛺䛔䛸䛔䛖䝸䝇䜽䛜䛒䜛䛾䛷㎰ᐙ䜒⡆༢䛻䛿㣕䜃䛴䛝䜎䛫䜣䚹㣤ᔱ䠖䛹䛖䜒䛒䜚䛜䛸䛖䛤䛦䛔䜎䛧䛯䚹ᮡᮏ䠄ྖ఍䠅䠖㻌
䛒䜚䛜䛸䛖䛤䛦䛔䜎䛧䛯䚹- 232 ２
３
２Expansion, Intensification, and Sustainability of Rice Production in West Africa:
The Case of Rainfed Lowland Rice in Côte d’Ivoire and Ghana

ProfileḈ஭ Ṋྖ Takeshi Sakaurai୍ᶫ኱Ꮫ⤒῭◊✲ᡤ ᩍᤵ
Professor, Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University
Contact: Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University
2-1 Naka, Kunitachi City,
Tokyo 186-8603, JAPANTel + 81 42 580 8327
Fax + 81 42 580 8333
E-mail: sakurai@ ier.hit-u.ac.jp

1985 ᖺᮾி኱Ꮫ⌮Ꮫ⣔◊✲⛉ື≀Ꮫᑓᨷಟኈㄢ⛬ಟ஢䚹ྠᖺ 4 ᭶䜘䜚䚸᪥⤒ BP ♫䠄ධ♫᫬♫ྡ䚸᪥⤒䝬䜾䝻䜴䝠䝹♫䠅䛻グ⪅䛸䛧䛶໅ົ䚹1989 ᖺ 9 ᭶䜘䜚䚸ఇ⫋䛧䚸⡿ᅜ䝭䝅䜺䞁ᕞ❧኱Ꮫ኱Ꮫ㝔䛻␃Ꮫ䚸㎰ᴗ⤒῭Ꮫ䜢Ꮫ䜆䚹1995 ᖺ 8 ᭶䚸ྠ኱Ꮫ䜘䜚 Ph.D.ᤵ୚䚸ྠᖺ 10 ᭶䚸㎰ᴗ⥲ྜ◊✲ᡤ䠄㎰ᯘỈ⏘ᨻ⟇◊✲ᡤ䛾
๓㌟䠅䛻୺௵◊✲ᐁ䛸䛧䛶᥇⏝䛥䜜䜛䚹1999 ᖺ 1 ᭶䜘䜚ᅜ㝿㎰ᯘỈ⏘ᴗ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊䛻ฟྥ䛧䚸ྠ䝉䞁䝍䞊䛾䛂䜰䝣䝸䜹✄స䝥䝻䝆䜵䜽䝖䛃䛻ཧ⏬䛧䛯䚹䛭䛾୍⎔䛸䛧䛶䝁䞊䝖䝆䝪䝽䞊䝹䛻䛒䜛す䜰䝣䝸䜹✄స㛤Ⓨ༠఍䠄WARDA - The Africa Rice Center䠅䛻䜶䝁䝜䝭䝇䝖䛸䛧䛶 2003 ᖺ 7 ᭶䜎䛷໅ົ䚹2004 ᖺ 4 ᭶䛻㎰ᯘỈ⏘ᨻ⟇◊✲ᡤ䛻᚟ᖐ䛧䚸ᅜ㝿ᨻ⟇㒊୺௵◊✲ᐁ䚹࿴ග኱Ꮫ⤒῭⤒ႠᏛ㒊ᩍᤵ䜢⤒䛶䚸⌧ᅾ䛿୍ᶫ኱Ꮫ⤒῭◊✲ᡤᩍᤵ䚹ᑓ㛛䛿䚸䝃䝤䝃䝝䝷䞉䜰䝣䝸䜹䛸༡䜰䝆䜰䛾㎰ᴗᢏ⾡䚸ኳ↛㈨※⟶⌮䚸㈋ᅔ๐ῶ䛻䛛䛛䜟䜛⤒῭ศᯒ䚹

Academic career
Professor Takeshi Sakurai received his Master degree in Zoology from Graduate School of
Science, the University of Tokyo in 1985, and Ph.D. in agricultural economics in August 1995 from
Michigan State University, USA.

Professional career
Professor Takeshi Sakurai started his professional career as a staff writer for Nikkei Business
Publications, Inc. After obtaining Ph.D., he joined the National Research Institute of Agricultural
Economics (the predecessor of PRIMAFF) in October 1995 as a senior economist. In January 1999,
he transferred to Japan International Research Center for Agricultural Sciences (JIRCAS) to work for
the Africa Rice Project, and worked as an economist at West Africa Rice Development Association(WARDA) in Cô te d’Ivoire until July 2003. From April, he returned to PRIMAFF and served as asenior economist for Policy Research Institute until March 2008. Professor of economics andbusiness management, Wako University from April 2008 to March 2009, and he has been a professorof Institute of Economic Research, Hitotsubashi University. His study covers economic analyses
on agricultural technologies, natural resource management, and poverty alleviation in sub-SaharanAfrica and South Asia.

- 233 ２
３
３➨䠏❶ 䜟䛜ᅜ䛾ྲྀ䜚⤌䜏
Chapter 3

Japan’s Activities

JIRCAS’s Research Activities Targeting at Improvement of Rice Varieties for Africa䜰䝣䝸䜹ྥ䛡䜲䝛ရ✀䛾ᨵⰋ䜢┠ᣦ䛧䛯 㻶㻵㻾㻯㻭㻿 䛷䛾◊✲㛤Ⓨ
JIRCAS’s Research Activities Targeting at Improvement of Rice Varieties for Africa⚄௦㻌 㝯㻌 㼀㼍㼗㼍㼟㼔㼕㻌㻷㼡㼙㼍㼟㼔㼕㼞㼛㻌⊂❧⾜ᨻἲேᅜ㝿㎰ᯘỈ⏘ᴗ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊䠄㻶㻵㻾㻯㻭㻿䠅㻌 ⏕≀㈨※㡿ᇦ㛗
Director, Biological Resources Division
Japan International Research Center for Agricultural Sciences (JIRCAS)

せ㻌 㻌 ⣙⊂❧⾜ᨻἲேᅜ㝿㎰ᯘỈ⏘ᴗ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊 (JIRCAS)䛿䚸ୡ⏺䚸䛸䜚䜟䛡Ⓨᒎ㏵ୖᆅᇦ䛾Ᏻᐃⓗ䛺㣗⣊⏕⏘䛻㎰ᴗ◊✲䜢㏻䛨䛶㈉⊩䛩䜛䛣䛸䜢䝭䝑䝅䝵䞁䛻ᥖ䛢䛶䛔䜛䚹Ⓨᒎ㏵ୖᆅᇦ䛷䛿ᖸ䜀䛴➼䛻䜘䜚㎰ᴗ⏕⏘䛜⬣䛛䛥䜜䜛ᶵ఍䛜ቑຍ䛧䛶䛚䜚䚸ᖸ䜀䛴䛺䛹䛾⎔ቃ䝇䝖䝺䝇⪏ᛶ䜢㔜せ䛺┠ᶆ䛸䛧䛶◊✲䜢᥎㐍䛧䛶䛔䜛䚹JIRCAS 䛿᪥ᮏᨻᗓ䛸ᅜ㐃㛤Ⓨィ⏬䛻䜘䜛䛂䜰䝣䝸䜹䞉䜰䝆䜰ඹྠ◊✲䠖䜰䝣䝸䜹䞉䜰䝆䜰✄䛾ရ✀஺㓄◊✲䝥䝻䝆䜵䜽䝖䛃䛻 1998 ᖺ䛛䜙ཧ⏬䛧䚸す䜰䝣䝸䜹✄㛤Ⓨ༠఍
(WARDA)䛻◊✲⪅䜢ὴ㐵䛧䛶䛝䛯䚹䛣䛣䛷䛿䚸䜰䝣䝸䜹䛾䜲䝛ရ✀䛾ᨵⰋ䛻㛵㐃䛧䛶 JIRCAS 䛷㐍⾜୰䛾◊✲ㄢ㢟䛻䛴䛔䛶⤂௓䛩䜛䚹
WARDA 䛷㛤Ⓨ䛥䜜䛯 NERICA 䛿⌧ᅾ䜰䝣䝸䜹ྛᆅ䜈䛾ᬑཬ䛜ᅗ䜙䜜䛶䛔䜛ẁ㝵䛷䛒䜛䛜䚸ᬑཬ䛻䛿䚸⣧ṇ䛺✀Ꮚ䛜኱㔞䛻‽ഛ䛥䜜䛶䛔䜛䛣䛸䛜๓ᥦ䛸䛺䜛䚹NERICA 䛾✀ᏊቑṪయ⣔䜢䜰䝣䝸䜹䛷ᵓ⠏䛩䜛䛯䜑䛻 JIRCAS ᡤᒓ䛾 JICA ᑓ㛛ᐙ䛷䛒䜛ụ⏣Ặ䛜 Benin 䛾 WARDA 䛷⫱✀ᐙ✀Ꮚ䛛䜙ཎ䚻✀䛾⏕⏘᪉ἲ䛾య⣔໬䛻ྲྀ䜚⤌䜣䛷䛔䜛䚹⫱✀ᐙ✀Ꮚ䛾ホ౯୰䛻䛔䛟䛴䛛䛾 NERICA 䛷䛿✀Ꮚ䛾ᆒ୍ᛶ䛜ᢸಖ䛥䜜䛶䛔䛺䛔䛣䛸䛜᫂䜙䛛䛸䛺䜚䚸✀ᏊቑṪయ⣔☜❧䛸䛸䜒䛻⫱✀ᐙ✀Ꮚ䛛䜙䛾⣧⣔㑅ᢤ䜢䜒ే⾜䛧䛶㐍䜑䛶䛔䜛䚹஝⇱䚸ෙỈ䛿䜰䝣䝸䜹䛾䜲䝛᱂ᇵ䛷䛿኱䛝䛺ไ㝈せᅉ䛷䛒䜚䚸䛣䜜䜙䛻⪏ᛶ䜢♧䛩䜲䝛㑇ఏ㈨※䛾㑅ᢤ䜢⾜䛖䛯䜑䛻 JIRCAS 䛿䠎ே䛾◊✲⪅䜢 WARDA 䛚䜘䜃 IRAG (䜼䝙䜰)䛻ὴ㐵䛧䛶䛔䜛䚹䛣䛾◊✲䛾┠ⓗ䛿⪏ᛶ䜢♧䛩㑇ఏ㈨※䛾㑅ᐃ䛸䚸⪏ᛶ䛻㛵㐃䛩䜛 DNA 䝬䞊䜹䞊䛾⋓ᚓ䛷䛒䜚䚸୧⪅䛿䚸⪏ᛶရ✀䜢⫱ᡂ䛩䜛㝿䛾᭷ຊ䛺䝒䞊䝹䛸䛺䜛䚹⎔ቃ䝇䝖䝺䝇⪏ᛶ䛾ศᏊⓗᶵᵓ䛾ゎ᫂䛻㛵䛩䜛◊✲䛻䜘䜚䚸✀䚻䛾⎔ቃ䝇䝖䝺䝇䛻ᑐ䛧䛶⪏ᛶ䜢♧䛩㑇ఏᏊ䜢༢㞳䛧䛯䚹⌧ᅾ䚸䛣䛾㑇ఏᏊ䜢ᅜ㝿㎰ᴗ◊✲ᶵ㛵䛸ඹྠ䛷ྛ✀స≀䛻ᑟධ୰䛷䛒䜛䛜䚸䛣䛾䛯䜃䚸JIRCAS ⊂⮬䛾◊✲ㄢ㢟䛸䛧䛶䛣䛾㑇ఏᏊ䜢 NERICA 䛻ᑟධ䛩䜛䝥䝻䝆䜵䜽䝖䜢㛤ጞ䛧䛯䚹䛣䜜䜙䛾◊✲άື䜢㏻䛨䛶䚸䛩䛷䛻⫱ᡂ䛥䜜䛯 NERICA䚸䛒䜛䛔䛿ᑗ᮶㛤Ⓨ䛥䜜䜛⎔ቃ䝇䝖䝺䝇⪏ᛶရ✀䛜䜰䝣䝸䜹ྛᆅ䛷᱂ᇵ䛥䜜䚸㣗⣊䛾Ᏻᐃ໬䛻⧅䛜䜛䛣䛸䜢ᮇᚅ䛧䛶䛔䜛䚹- 237 ２
３
７

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

JIRCAS’s Research Activities Targeting at Improvement of Rice Varieties for Africa㼀㼍㼗㼍㼟㼔㼕㻌㻷㼡㼙㼍㼟㼔㼕㼞㼛㻌Director, Biological Resources Division
Japan International Research Center for Agricultural Sciences (JIRCAS)

Abstract
Holding its mission to contribute to global agriculture, especially in developing regions,through research in agricultural sciences, JIRCAS has been conducting many research activities invarious areas of agriculture. Among traits needed for such regions, JIRCAS has been placing its
top priority in abiotic stress tolerance in a number of crops.
Since 1998, JIRCAS has dispatched its scientists to Africa Rice Center (WARDA), as amember of Collaborative Projects of Africa/Asia Joint Research on Interspecific Hybridization
between African and Asian Rice Species supported by Japanese Government and UNDP. In thisarticle, our on-going research activities dealing with improvement of rice varieties in Africa will
be introduced.
NERICA (New Rice for Africa) developed by WARDA is now in the phase of dissemination
to various cultivation regions in Africa. One of the pre-requisites for dissemination of newvarieties is availability of ample amount of certified seeds. Dr. Ikeda who is a specialist of JICA
and a member of JIRCAS has been establishing a seed propagation system for NERICA in
WARDA at Benin. During a course of evaluation of each variety, some of NERICA varieties
have been found to be not always homogeneous in the breeder seeds, which will cause serious
problems in practical cultivation. Therefore, along with developing the seed propagation system,
selection for pure lines has to be pursued.
Two scientists of JIRCAS have been conducting collaborative research on drought tolerance
and submergence tolerance of rice with WARDA (Nigeria) and Institut de Recherche
Agronomique de Guinee (IRAG). Wide ranges of rice germplasm including Oryza glaberrima
have been subjected to evaluation for tolerance of drought or submergence. As one of theindicators of drought tolerance, rooting depth is used. Goals of these projects are 1)
identification of germplasm with the tolerance, and 2) acquisition of DNA markers linked to suchtolerance, both of which can be a powerful tool in breeding programs targeting for drought andsubmergence tolerance of rice varieties in Africa.
As results of extensive molecular work on stress tolerance, JIRCAS has identified DREB
(dehydration responsive element binding protein) genes which confer tolerance to abiotic stresses
including drought, high salinity and low temperature. JIRCAS is collaborating with a number ofInternational Agriculture Research Institutes to develop abiotic stress tolerant varieties. Recently,
JIRCAS has initiated its internal project to develop drought tolerant NERICA by introducing thesegenes.
Through these research activities, both conventional and biotechnological, JIRCAS is hopingthat the existing NERICA as well as new stress tolerant varieties to be developed would contributetowards increased rice acreage in Africa.

Introduction
Under the mission to contribute to global
agriculture, especially in developing regions,through research in agricultural sciences, JIRCAS
has been conducting many research activities invarious areas of agriculture. Among traits needed

for such regions, JIRCAS has been placing its toppriority in abiotic stress tolerance in a number ofcrops.
Since 1998, JIRCAS has dispatched its scientists
to Africa Rice Center (WARDA), as a member ofCollaborative Projects of Africa/Asia Joint Researchon Interspecific Hybridization between African and- 238 ２３
８

JIRCAS’s Research Activities Targeting at Improvement of Rice Varieties for Africa

Asian Rice Species supported by Japanese
Government and UNDP.
In this article, ouron-going research activities dealing withimprovement of rice varieties in Africa will be
described.
Research
activities
targetinggenetic
improvement of rice adapted for African ecosystems
can be classified into the following 3 phases. The
first phase is targeting dissemination of the alreadydeveloped NERICA varieties. In the first phase,
higher priority should be placed in establishment ofseed propagation system as well as in accumulationof data on agronomic performance of each variety.
The second and the third phase are aiming at
improvement of drought tolerance of rice in Africa,
because among many stresses, drought has been
considered to be major constraints for riceproduction in Africa. In the second phase,conventional approach is taken and in the third
phase molecular approach is employed to attain thetargeted goal.

Phase 1

Research on the existing NERICA
varieties

NERICA (New Rice for Africa), developed by
WARDA by hybridization between Oryza sativa
and O. glaberrima and backcrossed with O. sativa,
is now in the phase of dissemination to various
cultivation regions in Africa. One of the
pre-requisites for dissemination of new varieties isavailability of ample amount of certified seeds.
Generally, seeds for farmers for a new variety
will be produced in the following steps; 1) breeders’seed, 2) foundation seeds, 3) registered seeds, and 4)
certified seeds from which seeds for farmers will befinally propagated. Dr. R. Ikeda who is a specialistof JICA and a member of JIRCAS has been
establishing a seed propagation system for NERICA
in WARDA at Benin. For establishment of an
overall seed propagation system for NERICA,
WARDA and ARI (African Rice Initiative) aretaking a role to establish a system for breeders’seeds and foundation seeds. During a course ofevaluation of breeders’ seed of each variety, some of
NERICA varieties have been found to be not always
homogeneous (Ikeda 2006), which will cause
serious problems in practical cultivation. Typical
off-types observed during the evaluation in the field
include, dwarf, abnormal panicle, sterility and albino(Table 1). It is not certain at this moment whether
these off-types are resulted from segregation or
simple mixture with other variety. Since thebreeders’ seed must be homogeneous in all aspects,
the first step for establishment of seed propagation
system for NERICA is to select a geneticallyhomogeneous line within a variety.
Another important point for disseminationof a new variety is to accumulate data on overallagronomic performance of each variety. Sincesuch date is limited for NERICA, systematic survey
will be definitely necessary involving field
evaluations at multiple sites.

Phase 2

Improvement of drought tolerance
by conventional approach

According to FAOSTAT, total acreage of rice
field in Sub-Saharan Africa is about 5 million ha.
About 80% of the rice field is so-called rain-fed
field (Table 2). Among many constraints to riceproduction, drought has been regarded to be mostserious one. In order to improve the productivity
in these regions as well as to expand rice cultivationarea, it is essential to develop rice varieties withhigher tolerance to drought.
Drought tolerance is a very complex trait. The
expression of drought tolerance depends oninteraction of different morphological (earliness,
reduced leaf area, leaf rolling, wax content, rooting
system, and reduced tillering),
physiological(reduced transpiration, high water use efficiency,
stomatal closure and osmotic adjustment) andbiochemical (accumulation of compatible solutes,
increased nitrate reductase activity and increased
storage of carbohydrates) characters (Mitra 2001).
Tobita et al. (2001) found that xylem exudation rate
can be used as a criterion to discriminate drought
resistant and susceptible rice varieties. With regard
to rooting system, the importance of a deep rootsystem has been repeatedly emphasized in rainfed
rice (Nguyen et al. 1997, Ito et al. 1999). Amongthe traits related to drought tolerance, we haveselected rooting depth as an indicator of droughttolerance.
Wide range of rice germplasm consisting of thecore collection of IRRI, the core collection of
National Institute of Agrobiological Sciences (NIAS)
in Japan, upland rice varieties provided by Ibaraki
Agricultural Center, and 86 lines of O. glaberrima
from WARDA was first evaluated in Bouake, Coted’Ivoire, for drought tolerance at seedling stage
using the standard evaluation system (IRRI 1996).
The varieties classified as drought tolerant were
subjected to measurement of root depth in the field.
Six drought tolerant varieties such as Azucena,- 239 ２３
９

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8Black Gora showed deeper roots compared withdrought sensitive varieties, indicating positive
correlation between drought tolerance and rooting
depth.
Under this evaluation, NERICA 1 - 4 andits parental lines were not regarded to have deeper
roots in the experimental field at WARDA(Sakagami and Tsunematsu 2003).
Furthermore, root depth at the reproductive stage
was evaluated for approximately 600 rice
germplasm including O. glaberrima. Based on the
deepest root length at the stage of 2 weeks after
heading, top 100 germplasm has been selected.
Second and third rounds of the evaluation are now
on-going at WARDA Nigeria Station.
After
identifying germplasm with deeper root, correlation
with drought tolerance at the reproductive stage will
be further examined. Also, hybridization between
germplasm with deep root and with shallow root
will be made for development of the segregating
population which will be used for Q TL analysis forrooting depth.

Phase 3

Molecular approach to improvedrought tolerance

JIRCAS molecular group has been conducting
research to elucidate molecular mechanisms of
abiotic stress tolerance of plant. The group hasrevealed the complex regulatory network of gene
expression in response to drought, high salinity andcold stresses using a model plant, Arabidopsis.
The Arabidopsis RD29A gene encoding a LEA (lateembryogenesis abundant)-like protein responds todry, high salinity and cold stresses strongly.
Through the yeast one hybrid method, atranscription factors that bind to DRE cis-acting
element on RD29A promoter was isolated from
Arabidopsis and named DREB (Dehydration
Responsive Element Binding protein).
Gene constructs consisting of constitutive
promoter 35S or stress inducible promoter RD29A
from Arabidopsis linked to DREB1A wereintroduced into Arabidopsis.
The resultant
transformants showed increased level of tolerance tofreezing, drought and high salt concentration. In
the case of 35S promoter, transformants showedretarded growth.
However, the use of stressinducible promoter, RD29 from Arabidopsis,
minimized the negative effect on the growth
retardation. DREB1 can activate more than 40 target
stress-inducible genes under stress condition.
Over-expression of DREB1 activated strong
expression of the target genes which, in tern,

resulted in an increased tolerance of freezing anddrought stresses. (For review; Nakashima andYamaguchi-Shinozaki 2005, Umezawa et al. 2006)
Orthologs for DREB1 were found in rice genome
and termed OsDREB.
Over-expression of
OsDREB1A in Arabidopsis resulted in higher
tolerance to high salinity and freezing stress(Dubouzet et al., 2003).
Furthermore, when
OsDREB1A under control of a constitutive
promoter was introduced into rice, the resultant
transgenic rice showed improved tolerance todrought (dehydration for 9 days), high salinity(250mM NaCl for 3 days) and low temperature (2䉝for 93 hr) stresses (Ito et al. 2006).
Results from the evaluation of transformed
Arabidopsis and rice at greenhouse-level indicatethat transcription factor genes, DREB1, has great
potential to generate crops which show tolerance toabiotic stresses, such as drought, high salinity andfreezing, at practical field level. To investigate towhat extent transformants carrying DREB genes
exhibit tolerance to abiotic stresses at field level,
JIRCAS has been carrying out collaborative
research with a number of international research
institutes including International Rice ResearchInstitute (IRRI), International Center for Tropical
Agriculture (CIAT), International Maize and Wheat
Improvement Center (CIMMYT), International
Crops Research Institute for the Semi-Arid Tropics(ICRISAT),
andInternational
Centerfor
Agricultural Research in the Dry Areas (ICARDA),
covering many different economically important
crops such as rice, wheat, soybean, lentil, groundnut,
and chickpea.
Since an ultimate goal of the collaborative
research is placed in generation of transformants
carrying a single and an intact copy of a transgene, atransformation protocol should enable to generatelarge number of independent primary transformants.
The reason why a large number of independenttransformants are necessary derives from the factthat any available transformation systems currently
available are not a perfect system in the sense thatthe following parameter cannot be controlled; 1)
intactness of transgene (without modification or
fragmentation of transgene), 2) copy number oftransgene (somehow related to number of locus fortransgene), 3) location of insertion of transgene inhost genome (resulting in positional effect), and 4)
suppression of somaclonal variation during
dedifferentiation phase (if tissue culture phase
involved).

- 240 ２
４０

JIRCAS’s Research Activities Targeting at Improvement of Rice Varieties for Africa

Although examples of large-scale transformation
are very limited, one example can be found in apaper by Hu et al. (2003). In their attempt togenerate elite transformants of herbicide tolerant
wheat, they found the frequency of such elite line as
0.8% and 0.2 % of primary transformants, byAgrobacterium and biolistic transformation method,respectively.
Therefore, a high-throughput
transformation system is certainly one of important
pre-requisites for obtainment of elite transformants.
JIRCAS has recently started its internaltransformation work aiming at improvement ofdrought tolerance of rice in Africa, including
NERICA. Since there has been no prior work ontransformation system of NERICA which is aninterspecific hybrid between O. sativa and O.
glaberrima, we are now working on establishmentof transformation system which would fulfill therequirements listed above.

Conclusion
Through these research activities, bothconventional and biotechnological, JIRCAS ishoping that the existing NERICA as well as newstress tolerant varieties to be developed would
contribute to not only stable production of rice but
also expansion of rice cultivation areas in Africa.

References
Dubouzet JG, Sakuma Y, Ito Y, Kasuga M,
Dubouzet EG, Miura S, Seki M, Shinozaki K,
Yamaguchi-Shinozaki K (2003) OsDREB
genes in rice, Oryza sativa L, encode
transcription activators that function in drought-,
high-salt- and cold-responsive gene expression.
Plant J. 33: 751-763.
Hu T, Metz S, Chay C, Zhou HP, Biest N, Chen G,
Cheng M, Feng X , Radionenko M, Lu F, Fry J(2003) Agrobacterium-mediated large scaletransformation of wheat (Triticum aestivum L.)
using glyphosate selection. Plant Cell Rep. 21:
1010-1019.
Ikeda R. (2006) Support African rice cultivation
through seed propagation of NERICA.
Outline of Japan’s Overseas Cooperation in
Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries. 2006-1:
38-43.

IRRI (1996) Standard evaluation system for rice.
IRRI, Los Banos, Philippines.
Ito O, O’Tool J, Hardy B (1999) Genetic
improvement of rice for water-limited
environments. Workshop on Genetic
Improvement of Rice for Water-Limited
Environment, International Rice ResearchInstitute, Dec. 1-3 (1998).
Ito Y, Katsura K, Maruyama K, Taji T, Kobayashi
M, Seki M, Shinozaki K, Yamaguchi-Shinozaki
K (2006) Functional analysis of rice
DREB/CBF-type transcription factors involved incold-responsive gene expression in transgenic
rice. Plant Cell Physiol. 47: 141-153.
Mitra J (2001) Genetics and genetic improvementof drought resistance in crop plants. Curr. Sci.
80: 758-763.
Nakashima K, Yamaguchi-Shinozaki K (2005)
Molecular studies on stress-responsive gene
expression in Arabidopsis and improvement ofstress tolerance in crop plants by regulon
biotechnology. JARQ 39: 221-229.
Nguyen HT, Babu RC, Blum A (1997) Breedingfor drought resistance in rice: physiology andmolecular genetics considerations. Crop Sci. 37:
1426-1434.
Sakagami J, Tsunematsu H (2003) Cultivar
difference in drought tolerance on deep-rooted
ability. Japan J. Crop Sci. 72 (suppl 1):
106-107.
Tobita S, Ookawa T, Audebert AY, Jones MP (2001)
X ylem exudation rate: a proposed screening
criterion for drought resistance in rice. 6 th
Symp. Intl. Soc. Root Research pp. 310-312.
Umezawa T, Fujita M, Fujita Y,
Yamaguchi-Shinozaki K, Shinozaki K (2006)
Engineering drought tolerance in plants:
discovering and tailoring genes to unlock the
future. Curr. Opinion Biotech. 17: 113-122.

- 241 ２
４
１International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Table 1Off-types found in NERICA varieties.

NERICA
VarietyFrequency of
Off-type (%)

1

0.25

Drarf, Abnormal panicle

2

7.39

Early maturity, Dwarf, Semi-sterility

3

0.99

Early maturity, Dwarf, Abnormal tillering, Semi-sterility

4--

Mixture5

4.83

Broad leaf, Narrow leaf, Semi-sterility, Abnormal tillering

6

6.33

Dwarf, Early maturity, Semi-sterility, Abnormal tillering

7

0.36

Dwarf, Plant elongation, Narrow leaf, Abnormal tillering, Semi-sterility

Example of Off-type

Source: Ikeda (2006)

Table 2

Cropping System of Rice in Sub-Saharan Africa

Cropping System

Area (%)*

Major Constraints

Rainfed Lowland

42.6

Iron toxicity, Floods, Insects, Diseases, Drought

Upland37.1

Drought, Weeds, Disease (Blast), Pests, Low inputs

Irrigated

13.9

Diseases, Insects, Pests, Weeds, Nutrient deficiency, Toxicity

Deepwater

4.8

Mangrove

1.6* After Nguyen and Tran (2002)- 242 ２４
２

JIRCAS’s Research Activities Targeting at Improvement of Rice Varieties for Africa

ឋွࣖሉ
3WGUVKQP CPF #PUYGT 5GUUKQP䜰䝣䝸䜹ྥ䛡䜲䝛ရ✀䛾ᨵⰋ䜢┠ᣦ䛧䛯 JIRCAS 䛷䛾◊✲㛤Ⓨ
JIRCAS䇻s Research Activities Targeting at Improvement of Rice Varieties for Africa⚄௦㻌 㝯㻌 Takashi Kumashiro⊂❧⾜ᨻἲே ᅜ㝿㎰ᯘỈ⏘ᴗ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊䠄JIRCAS䠅㻌 ⏕≀㈨※㡿ᇦ㛗
Director, Biological Resources Division
Japan International Research Center for Agricultural Sciences (JIRCAS)
ྖ఍䠖㻌 ᯇᮏ㻌 ဴ⏨㻌 Chair person: Tetsuo Matsumotoྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫᅜ㝿ᩍ⫱༠ຊ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊㻌 ᩍᤵ
Professor, ICCAE, Nagoya Universityᯇᮏ 䠄ྖ఍䠅䠖⚾䛾䜋䛖䛛䜙㉁ၥ䛥䛫䛶䜒䜙䛳䛶䜒䛔䛔䛷䛩䛛䚹ඛ䜋䛹䝻䞊䜹䝹䛾䜒䛾䛸ẚ㍑䛧䛶஝⇱䛾䝇䝖䝺䝇䛻ᑐ䛩䜛᢬ᢠᛶ䛾ၥ㢟䛷䛩䛜䚸NERICA 䛿୍⯡ⓗ䛻ᙅ䛔䛸⪃䛘䛶䛔䛔䛾䛷䛧䜗䛖䛛䠛䛭䜜䛛䜙䚸䛭䛣䛻ධ䛳䛶䛟䜛௒ᗘ᪂䛧䛟ฟ䜛஝⇱㑇ఏᏊ䛾 drought tolerance 䛿䚸ඛ䜋䛹䛾ㄝ᫂䛷䛩䛸䚸ሷ䛸䛛䜎䛯䚸ᗘ䛸䛾㛵ಀ䛷䝇䝖䝺䝇⪏ᛶ䛜㧗䜎䜛䛸䛔䛖ຠᯝ䛜䛒䜛䛸ᛮ䛖䛾䛷䛩䛜䚸䛭䜜䜒䜔䛿䜚ྠ䛨㑇ఏᏊ䛜 tolerance 㛵ಀ䛾䜒䛾䜢䛩䜉䛶䝁䞁䝖䝻䞊䝹䛧䛶䛔䜛䛸⪃䛘䛶䛔䛔䛾䛷䛧䜗䛖䛛䚸䛒䜛䛔䛿⏕⌮ⓗ䛺௙⤌䜏䛜䛭䛖䛺䛳䛶䛔䜛䛸⪃䛘䛶䜘䜝䛧䛔䛾䛷䛧䜗䛖䛛䠛⚄௦䠖 䜎䛪୍␒┠䛾㉁ၥ䛷䛩䛜䚸WARDA 䛾䝟䞁䝣䝺䝑䝖䛻 drought 䛻䛴䛔䛶᭩䛔䛶䛒䜚䜎䛩䛜䚸஝⇱᢬ᢠᛶ䛿䛔䜝䛔䜝」㞧䛺䝯䜹䝙䝈䝮䜒䛒䜚䚸drought escape 䛷䛒䜛䛣䛸䛿☜䛛䛷䛩䚹⏕⫱ᮇ㛫䛜▷䛔䚸䛴䜎䜚ᡂ⇍䜎䛷 100 ᪥௨ෆ䛷䜔䜛䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䛷䚸஝⇱䛜᮶䜛๓䛻඲㒊཰✭䛧⤊䛘䜛䛾䛷䚸஝⇱䛻䛒䜟䛪䛻཰✭䛷䛝䜛䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䛜䚸䛣䛣䛷䛿ṇ䛧䛔䛸ᛮ䛔䜎䛩䚹䛧䛛䛧䚸᰿䛜㛗䛔䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䛺䛾䛛䚸䛒䜛䛔䛿ᮏᙜ䛻Ỉ䛾↓䛔䚸Ỉ䛾ᑡ䛺䛔䛸䛣䜝䛷䛹䛖䛺䜛䛛䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䛻㛵䛧䛶䛿䚸ᡃ䚻䛾䝕䞊䝍䚸䛭䜜䛛䜙௚䛻䜒䛔䛟䛴䛛▱䛳䛶䛔䜛䛾䛷䛩䛜䚸ᚲ䛪䛧䜒䛭䜜䜋䛹ᙉ䛟䛺䛔䛸⚾䛿ᛮ䛳䛶䛔䜎䛩䚹㻌 㻌 䛭䜜䛛䜙 drought 䛾ヰ䛷䛩䛜䚸䛣䜜䛿☜䛛䛻 drought 㑇ఏᏊ䜢஺㙐䛥䛫䜛䛸㻌 ஝⇱䚸ሷ䚸ప䚸䛣䛾୕䛴䛻ຠ䛝䜎䛩䚹䛣䜜䛿 moist level 䛸ྠ䛨䛷䛩䚹䛣䛾୕䛴䛻ඹ㏻䛧䛶䛔䜛䛣䛸䛜䛒䜚䜎䛧䛶䚸䛣䜜䛿㠀ᖖ䛻⣽⬊䛾ᾐ㏱ᅽ䛜㧗䛟䛺䜚䜎䛩䚹䛸䛔䛖䛾䛿Ỉ䛜ᢤ䛡䜛䛛䜙䛷䛩䚹䛭䛖䛔䛖䛣䛸䛷኱୔ኵ䛰䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䛷䚸䛭䛣䛾䝯䜹䝙䝈䝮䛷䛿☜䛛䛻ຠᯝ䛜䛒䜚䜎䛩䚹䛧䛛䛧䛣䛾㑇ఏᏊ䜢ධ䜜䛯䛛䜙᰿䛜῝䛟䛺䜛䛸䛛䚸䛒䜛䛔䛿ẼᏍ䛾㛤໬ᗘ䛜ኚ䜟䜛䛛䛸䛔䛖䛸䚸䛭䛖䛔䛳䛯䛣䛸䜎䛷䛿ᮇᚅ䛷䛝䛺䛔䛸ᛮ䛔䜎䛩䚹䛰䛛䜙䚸䛭䛣䛿Ⰽ䚻䛺௚䛾ᛶ㉁䜢⤌䜏ྜ䜟䛫䛶⥲ྜⓗ䛻᢬ᢠᛶ䜢ୖ䛢䛶䛔䛛䛺䛡䜜䜀䛺䜙䛺䛔䛸ᛮ䛔䜎䛩䚹ඛ䛪ᡃ䚻䛜䜔䜙䛺䛡䜜䜀䛔䛡䛺䛔䛣䛸䛿䚸㑇ఏᏊ䛾䝕䞊䝍䝰䞊䝗䛜ᚲせ䛺᫬䛻䚸䛹䛾䛒䛯䜚䛾䝺䞁䝆䛷⪏ᛶ䜢♧䛩䛾䛛䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䜢䛱䜓䜣䛸グ㘓䛧䛺䛟䛶䛿䛔䛡䛺䛔䛸ᛮ䛳䛶䛔䜎䛩䚹- 243 ２
４
３

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8ᯇᮏ㸦ྖ఍㸧䠖
௚䛻䛤㉁ၥ䛿䛒䜚䜎䛩䛛䠛㣤ᔱ䠖 NERICA 䛜௚䛾ရ✀➼䛸ΰ䛦䛳䛶䛔䜛䜒䛾䛜䛒䜛ྍ⬟ᛶ䜢᭱ึ䛾䜋䛖䛾䝇䝷䜲䝗䛷ゝཬ䛥䜜䛶䛔䜎䛧䛯䛜䚸≉䛻 NERICA 䛾 4 ␒䛜௚䛾䜒䛾䛸ẚ䜉䛶㠀ᖖ䛻᰿䜒኱䛝䛔䛧䚸஝⇱䛩䜛ᗘྜ䛔䜒㧗䛔䛸䛔䛖䛾䛜䚸⚾⮬㌟䜒᱂ᇵ䛧䛶䛔䛶䛭䛖ឤ䛨䛶䛔䜛䛾䛷䛩䛜䚸䛣䜜䛜䛹䛖䜒䚸௚䛾䜒䛾䛸ΰ䛦䛳䛶䛔䜛䛸䛔䛖䝕䞊䝍䛜ฟ䛶䛔䜎䛧䛶䚹⚄௦䠖 䛣䜜䛿䛨䛴䛿䚸⫱✀ᐙ✀Ꮚ䛻䜅䛯䛴䛒䛳䛯䛾䛷䛩䚹䛒䜛ே䛜ᣢ䛳䛶䛔䛶ྡ๓䛿ᛀ䜜䛯䛾䛷䛩䛜䚸䛭䜜䛜ΰ䛦䛳䛶䛔䛯䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䛷䛩䚹ᑓ㛛ᐙ䛾ヰ䛻䜘䜚䜎䛩䛸䚸ศ䛡䛶䛒䜜䜀䛒䜣䛺䛻䜂䛹䛔⤖ᯝ䛿ฟ䛶䛔䛺䛛䛳䛯䚸䜒䛖ᑡ䛧䜎䛸䜒䛰䛳䛯䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䛷䛩䚹䛹䛱䜙䛜Ⰻ䛔䛛䛿䜟䛛䜚䜎䛫䜣䛜䚹㣤ᔱ䠖 䛭䛖䛧䜎䛩䛸䚸௚䛾 NERICA 䛻㏆䛔䜘䛖䛺䜒䛾䛜 NERICA 4 䛰䛳䛯䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䛷䛩䛽䚹䛒䛾䚸
NERICA 4 䛿䛸䛶䜒㠀ᖖ䛻ఱ䛛䚸䛱䜗䛳䛸ኚ䜟䛳䛶䛔䜛䛺䛸䛔䛖༳㇟䜢ཷ䛡䜎䛧䛯䛾䛷䚹⚄௦䠖 䛹䜜䛛䛸ゝ䜟䜜䜛䛸⚾䜒䜘䛟䜟䛛䜙䛺䛔䛾䛷䛩䛜䈈䚹㣤ᔱ䠖 䛿䛔䚸䛹䛖䜒䛒䜚䛜䛸䛖䛤䛦䛔䜎䛧䛯䚹ὸ἟䠖 Submergence tolerance 䛸䛔䛖䛾䛿≉Ṧ䛺᮲௳䛷䛭䛖䛔䛖ၥ㢟䛜䛒䜛䛾䛷䛧䜗䛖䛛䚸䛒䜛䛔䛿䚸ఱ䛛⎔ቃၥ㢟䛺䛹䛜䛒䜛䛸ᛮ䛖䛾䛷䛩䛜䚸䛹䛖䛔䛖䛸䛣䜝䛷䛭䛣䛻ὀ┠䛥䜜䛯䛾䛷䛩䛛䚹⚄௦䠖 ᚲ䛪䛧䜒≉Ṧ䛺౛䛷䛿䛺䛔䛷䛩䚹䛔䜟䜖䜛 lowland rainfed 䛾ሙྜ䛿᭱ึ䛿䛔䜔䛸䛔䛖䜋䛹Ỉ䛜䛒䛳䛶䚸䛭䜜䛛䜙ᛴ䛻䛺䛟䛺䛳䛶᭱ᚋ䛿஝⇱䛻䛺䜛䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䛷䛩䚹せ䛩䜛䛻Ỉ䛿䛒䜛䛾䛰䛡䜜䛹䛭䛾㓄ศ䛜䝁䞁䝖䝻䞊䝹䛷䛝䛺䛔䛛䜙Ⰽ䚻䛺ၥ㢟䛜㉳䛝䛶䛟䜛䜟䛡䛷䛩䚹䛰䛛䜙䚸᭱ึ䛿㻌 submergence 䛷䜔䜙䜜䜛䛣䛸䜒䛒䜛䜟䛡䛷䚸䛭䛣䛻ᑐ䛧䛶䜒䛒䜛⛬ᗘ⪏ᛶ䛜䛺䛔䛸䚸≉䛻 lowland 䛻䛿㐺䛥䛺䛔䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䛷ጞ䜑䛯䜟䛡䛷䛩䚹ὸ἟䠖 䛭䜜䛿ᗂⱑᮇ䛾ヰ䛧䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䛷䛩䛛䠛⚄௦䠖 䛭䛖䛷䛩䛽䚸⏕⫱ึᮇ䛷䛩䛽䚹ᯇᮏ㸦ྖ఍㸧䠖
⚄௦ඛ⏕䚸䛒䜚䛜䛸䛖䛤䛦䛔䜎䛧䛯䚹- 244 ２４
４

JIRCAS’s Research Activities Targeting at Improvement of Rice Varieties for Africa

Profile⚄௦ 㝯 Takashi Kumashiro⊂❧⾜ᨻἲேᅜ㝿㎰ᯘỈ⏘ᴗ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊䠄JIRCAS䠅㻌 ⏕≀㈨※㡿ᇦ㛗
Director, Biological Resources Division
Japan International Research Center for Agricultural Sciences (JIRCAS)
Contact:

Biological Resources Division
Japan International Research Center for Agricultural Sciences (JIRCAS)
1-1, Ohwashi, Tsukuba, Ibaraki, 305-8686, Japan
Tel: + 81-29-838-6305
Fax: + 81-29-838-6604
Email: kumasiro@ jircas.affrc.go.jp

1974 ᖺ䛻ி㒔኱Ꮫ኱Ꮫ㝔㎰Ꮫ◊✲⛉䠄⫱✀Ꮫᑓᨷ䠅䜢ಟ஢䛧䚸Ẹ㛫௻ᴗ䛻䛚䛔䛶᳜≀䝞䜲䜸䝔䜽䝜䝻䝆䞊ศ㔝䜢ᢸᙜ䛧䚸ⵂᇵ㣴䛻䜘䜛༙ᩘయ⫱✀ἲ䛾☜❧䚸㠀ᑐ⛠⣽⬊⼥ྜ䜢⏝䛔䛯᰾䇷⣽⬊㉁⨨᥮䛻䜘䜛㞝ᛶ୙⛱ᛶရ✀䛾㛤Ⓨ䚸䛚䜘䜃༢Ꮚⴥ᳜≀䛾ᙧ㉁㌿᥮ἲ䛾㛤Ⓨ䛺䛹◊✲㛤Ⓨ䛻ᚑ஦䛧䛯䚹◊✲㛤Ⓨ⟶⌮㒊㛛䜢⤒䛶䚸2004 ᖺ 7 ᭶䛻 JIRCAS 䛾⌧⫋䛻ᑵ䛔䛯䚹

Academic career
Mr. Takashi Kumashiro graduated from Graduate School of Kyoto University in 1974 with amajor in Plant Breeding.

Professional career
After graduation, Mr. Kumashiro immediately joined a private company where he conducted andwas involved in biotechnology-related research projects, including haploid breeding using antherculture, asymmetric protoplast fusion, and development of Agrobacterium-mediated transformation formonocots. With his wealthy experience in management of research and development, Takashi
Kumashiro joined Japan International Research Center for Agricultural Sciences (JIRCAS) in 2004
and is currently the Director of the Biological Resources Division.

- 245 ２
４
５JICA’s NERICA Dissemination in Africa㻶㻵㻯㻭 䛾䜰䝣䝸䜹䛻䛚䛡䜛䝛䝸䜹ᬑཬᨭ᥼㻌
JICA’s NERICA Dissemination in Africaෆᓥ㻌 ගᏕ㻌 㻹㼕㼠㼟㼡㼠㼍㼗㼍㻌㼁㼏㼔㼕㼖㼕㼙㼍㻌⊂❧⾜ᨻἲேᅜ㝿༠ຊᶵᵓ䠄㻶㻵㻯㻭䠅㻌Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA)

せ㻌 㻌 ⣙JICA 䛾䝛䝸䜹ᬑཬᨭ᥼䛿䚸2002 ᖺ 8 ᭶䛾 WSSD 䛚䜘䜃 2003 ᖺ 10 ᭶䛾 TICAD3 䛻䛚䛔䛶䚸䜟䛜ᅜ䛜䜰䝣䝸䜹㎰ᴗ㛤Ⓨᨭ᥼䛾ලయⓗ䛺㈉⊩⟇䛸䛧䛶䝛䝸䜹䛾ᬑཬಁ㐍䜢ᡴ䛱ฟ䛧䛯䛣䛸䜢ཷ䛡䚸
2003 ᖺ䜘䜚㛤ጞ䛥䜜䛯䚹
JICA 䛿䚸70 ᖺ௦䜘䜚኱つᶍ℺₅✄స䛻䜘䜛䜰䝣䝸䜹䜈䛾✄స༠ຊ䜢ᐇ᪋䛧䛶䛚䜚䚸90 ᖺ௦䛛䜙䛿㎰Ẹཧຍᆺ䛾ᑠつᶍ℺₅✄స༠ຊ䜢㛤ጞ䛧䚸✄స䛻ᑐ䛩䜛༠ຊ䜢⾜䛳䛶䛔䛯䚹Ỉ✄᱂ᇵ䛿Ẽೃ䜔ᆅᙧ䛻䜘䜚ᬑཬ䛜ไ㝈䛥䜜䜛䛣䛸䜒䛒䜚䚸䝛䝸䜹ᨭ᥼䛜ຍ䜟䛳䛯䛣䛸䛷䚸JICA 䛾✄స༠ຊ䛿Ỉ✄䛸㝣✄䛻ᣑ኱䛥䜜䜛䛣䛸䛸䛺䛳䛯䚹㻌 䝛䝸䜹ᬑཬ䛻ᑐ䛩䜛 JICA 䛾༠ຊ䛿䚸㎰ᴗ䞉㎰ᮧ㛤Ⓨศ㔝䛻䛚䛡䜛୺せ䛺䜰䝣䝸䜹ᨭ᥼⟇䛸䛧䛶఩⨨䛵䛡䜙䜜䚸2003 ᖺ䛾ᇶ♏ㄪᰝᅋ䛾ὴ㐵௨㝆䚸ྛᅜ䜈ὴ㐵୰䛾㎰ᴗᑓ㛛ᐙ䜢㏻䛨䛶䛾༠ຊ䜢㛤ጞ䛧䛯䚹䜎䛯䚸2004 ᖺ䛻䛿䝛䝸䜹஦ᴗ䛻ᑓᚑ䛩䜛ᑓ㛛ᐙ䜢䜴䜺䞁䝎䜈䠍ྡὴ㐵䛩䜛䛸ඹ䛻䚸2005 ᖺ䛻䛿䝧䝘䞁䛾 WARDA 䜈䠎ྡ䛾䝛䝸䜹ᑓ㛛ᐙ䜢ὴ㐵䛧䛯䚹⌧ᅾ䜎䛷䛻䚸䛣䜜䜙䛾䝛䝸䜹ᑓ㛛ᐙ䛺䜙䜃䛻ྛᅜ䛾㎰ᴗᑓ㛛ᐙ䛻䜘䜚䝛䝸䜹ᬑཬᨭ᥼䛜㐍䜑䜙䜜䛶䛚䜚䚸༠ຊ䜢ᐇ᪋䛧䛯ᅜ䛿䠍䠑䜹ᅜ䠄䝧䝘䞁䚸䜶䝏䜸䝢䜰䚸䜺䞁䝡䜰䚸䜺䞊䝘䚸䜼䝙䜰䚸䜿䝙䜰䚸䝬䝎䜺䝇䜹䝹䚸䝬䝷䜴䜱䚸䝬䝸䚸䝰䝄䞁䝡䞊䜽䚸䝘䜲䝆䜵䝸䜰䚸䝉䝛䜺䝹䚸䝍䞁䝄䝙䜰䚸䜴䜺䞁䝎ཬ䜃䝆䞁䝞䝤䜶䠅䛻ୖ䜛䚹ᙜ㠃䛾䝛䝸䜹ᬑཬᨭ᥼䛿䚸䜴䜺䞁䝎ཬ䜃 WARDA 䜈䛾䝛䝸䜹ᑓ㛛ᐙὴ㐵䜢୰ᚰ䛻䚸䛣䜜䜙䛾ᑓ㛛ᐙ䛻䜘䜛࿘㎶ᅜ䜈䛾ᕠᅇᣦᑟ䚸୪䜃䛻ྛᅜὴ㐵䛾㎰ᮧ㛤Ⓨᑓ㛛ᐙ䛾༠ຊ䜢ᚓ䛺䛜䜙䚸ྛᅜヨ㦂◊✲ᡤ䛾◊✲ဨ䚸ᬑཬဨ䚸ᣦᑟⓗ㎰ᐙ➼䛾ே㐀䜚༠ຊ䜢୰ᚰ䛸䛧䛶ᨭ᥼䛧䛶䛔䛟᪉㔪䛷䛒䜛䚹㻌 䝛䝸䜹䛾㛤Ⓨ䞉ᬑཬ䛾䛯䜑䛻䛿䚸䠐䛴䛾䝇䝔䞊䝆䠄⫱✀䡚ヨ㦂◊✲䞉ᐇド䡚✀ᏊቑṪ䡚ᬑཬ䠅䛜ᚲせ䛷䛒䜛䛸ゝ䜟䜜䛶䛔䜛䚹ARI(African Rice Initiative)䛜ᥖ䛢䜛┠ᶆ䛷䛒䜛᱂ᇵ㠃✚䛾ᣑ኱䛻ᐤ୚䛩䜛䛯䜑䚸JICA 䛸䛧䛶䛿䛂ヨ㦂◊✲䞉ᐇド䛃ཬ䜃䛂✀ᏊቑṪ䛃䜢୰ᚰ䛻༠ຊ䜢⾜䛳䛶䛔䛟ィ⏬䛷䛒䜛䚹䛣䜜䜙䛾ྲྀ䜚⤌䜏䛻䛒䛯䛳䛶䛿䚸ྛᅜ䛾≧ἣ䛻ྜ䜟䛫䛯ᑐᛂ䛜ᚲせ䛷䛒䜛䚹䛩䛺䜟䛱䚸᪤䛻ရ✀ヨ㦂䜢ᐇ᪋䛧䛶䛔䜛ᅜ䛻䛴䛔䛶䛿䚸ヨ㦂⤖ᯝ䛾ศᯒཬ䜃ዡບရ✀ೃ⿵䛾㑅ᐃ䛻䛴䛔䛶༠ຊ䜢┠ᣦ䛧䚸୍᪉䚸䛣䜜䛛䜙ရ✀ヨ㦂䜢㛤ጞ䛩䜛ᅜ䛻䛴䛔䛶䛿䚸࿘㎶ᅜ䛾⤒㦂䜢㋃䜎䛘䛯ヨ㦂ィ⏬䛾ᶆ‽໬ཬ䜃ရ✀ẚ㍑ヨ㦂䛾ᑟධ䜢┠ᣦ䛧䛶䛔䛟䛣䛸䛜ᚲせ䛸⪃䛘䛶䛔䜛䚹䝛䝸䜹ᬑཬᨭ᥼䛻䛒䛯䛳䛶䛿䚸ෆእ䛾ㅖᶵ㛵䛸䛾㐃ᦠᙉ໬䛜㔜せ䛷䛒䜚䚸䛣䜜䜢᥎㐍䛥䛫䜛䛸ྠ᫬䛻䚸
JICA ෆ㒊䛻䛚䛔䛶䜒௚䛾஦ᴗ䝇䜻䞊䝮䛸䛾㐃ᦠ䜢㐍䜑䜛䜉䛟యไᩚഛ䜢㐍䜑䛶䛔䜛≧ἣ䛸䛺䛳䛶䛔䜛䚹- 247 ２４
７International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

JICA’s NERICA Dissemination in Africa㻹㼕㼠㼟㼡㼠㼍㼗㼍㻌㼁㼏㼔㼕㼖㼕㼙㼍㻌
Project Management Officer
Central and West Africa Team, Rural Development Department
Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA)

Abstract
JICA started NERICA dissemination in 2003 which was inline with the government
policy to support NERICA for agricultural development in Africa as declared in WSSD
and TICAD III held in 2002 and 2003 respectively.
JICA’s cooperation in rice cultivation commenced in the 1970s by means of paddy
rice cultivation with equipped irrigation schemes in large scale, then it turned over tosmall-scaled irrigated rice cultivation with farmers’ participation in the 1990s. The target
crop of these interventions was paddy rice which needs much water for its harvest,
therefore, possible extension area depended on climate and geographic condition. Since
2003, JICA’s cooperation in rice cultivation extends to both paddy and NERICA rice.
JICA commenced its NERICA cooperation by trial cultivations through theparticipation of the existing agricultural projects of JICA as well as sending of preliminary
study teams to survey possible areas for dispatch of NERICA experts. Then, JICA
dispatched one expert to Uganda in 2004 and two experts to WARDA in Benin in 2005.
Strengthening of NERICA dissemination has been implemented through NERICA experts
and other existing agricultural projects of JICA in over 15 countries such as in Benin,
Ethiopia, Gambia, Ghana, Guinea, Kenya, Madagascar, Malawi, Mali, Mozambique,
Nigeria, Senegal, Tanzania, Uganda and Zimbabwe.
JICA aims to expand its cooperation through visits of the NERICA experts based in
Uganda and Benin to the surrounding countries and strengthening of collaboration between
the NERICA experts and the existing agricultural projects to support researchers
conducting varietal trails, extension workers and model farmers.
NEIRCA dissemination would be classified by four phases such as breeding, varietal
trial, seed multiplication and extension to the farmers. To contribute to the progress of
WARDA/ARI (African Rice Initiative), JICA will concentrate on varietal trial and seedmultiplication which will sustain future expansion of NERICA in Africa.
It is necessary to consider how to participate in the progress of NERICA disseminationof the country to adopt our intervention to the country’s situation. JICA will concentrate
more on improvement of data analysis and selection of recommended varieties in the
countries where the varietal trials are already in progress, meanwhile introduction andstandardization of experimental method are given priorities in countries where varietal
trials are about to be commenced.
NERICA dissemination should be conducted in association among research institutes,
pilot projects and extension organizations. Therefore, JICA plans to extend collaboration
with other institutions as well as collaboration with JICA’s other cooperation schemes.

- 248 ２
４
８

JICA’s NERICA Dissemination in Africa

NERICA Dissemination of
JICA

Japan International
Cooperation Agency (JICA)
1

JICA’s Support to NERICA

2- 249 ２４
９

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Trade of Major Crops• Trade ratio of rice is much lower than othermajor crops.
Production
䠄million t䠅

Trade䠄million t䠅Trade Ratio
䠄䠂䠅

Rice

40

2.7

6.7

Wheat

55

10.7

18.5

Corn

60

7.8

12.8

Rice is a crop mostly consumed
in domestic markets

3

Crop Production in Sub-Saharan Africa• Rice is no longer miner crop in SubSaharan Africa.
1970

1990

1998

Rice
(mil. t)Corn(mil. t)

2.44

5.80

7.32

4.99

7.94

9.16

Sorghum(mil. t)Millet(mil. t)

6.63

7.79

9.18

6.51

8.12

9.76
Lunch served in a local
restaurant in Uganda

4- 250 ２
５
０JICA’s NERICA Dissemination in Africa

Food Security in Sub-Saharan Africa• Demand for rice is increasing– Rice is becoming popular recently• Local production does not meet its demand– Lack of paddy field– Low yield– Lack of materials– Pest & diseases– Lack of tech.

n
tio
p
m
su
n
Co

n
uctio
d
o
r
P
5

JICA’s assistance in rice production• 70’s – 90’s
– Irrigated rice in large scale (paddy rice)• 90’s– Irrigated rice in small scale with PRA
䠄Participatory Rural Appraisal䠅
paddy

upland6<<Gov. assistance to NERICA dissemination>>
2002 : Stated in WSSD
2003 : Stated in TICAD III• 2003– Commencement of NERICA
activities of JICA

- 251 ２
５
１International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8Japan’s contribution to Agric. Dev.
Manifestation in TICAD III.
䠍 Assistance in the formulation of agricultural
policies䠎 Improving food productivity
䠏 NERICA Initiative
䠐 Sustainable rural development throughindependent efforts of African people
䠑 Emergency measures to combat famine䠒 Fight against desertification
䠓 Nurturing small enterprises and vitalization of theinformal sector through ODA
7What is “NERICA” ?
#UKCP4KEG
#UKCP4KEG1INCDGTTKOC
1INCDGTTKOC#HTKECP4KEG#HTKECP4KEG1UCVKXC
1UCVKXCYield:
Yield:highhigh

Yield:
Yield:low
lowTolerance:
Tolerance:lowlowTolerance:
Tolerance:hifh
hifh

cross
0'4+%#  0GY 4KEG HQT #HTKEC
8- 252 ２
５
２

JICA’s NERICA Dissemination in Africa

Japan’s Support to NERICA
WARDA••1971:
1971: EstablishedEstablished••1991:
1991: IHP
IHPResearch
Research••1994:
1994: Birth
BirthofofNERICANERICA

Japan
1978- ::Collaboration
1978Collaborationin
in
Univ.
&
Research
Institute
Univ. & Research Institute
level
level
1997:
1997:Budget
Budgetassistanceassistanceof
of
the
Gov.
of
Japan
for
the Gov. of Japan for
NERICA
NERICAdevelopment
development
throughthroughUNDP
UNDP

9Release of NERICA 1 to 7

JICA’s intervention for NERICA
1. Experts to WARDA
2. Expert to Uganda
3. Experimentations
conducted by theexisting agric.
projects
4. Technical seminars
held in AICAD of
Kenya.

10- 253 ２
５
３

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

NERICA around JICA expert in Uganda

Capable to increase
local rice production invarious uplandcondition.
11

Priority in NERICA dissemination

breeding

dissemination

Experimental trials

Seed multiplication

JICA’s priority
12- 254 ２
５
４

1.
1. Capacity
Capacity
development
developmentofofricericeresearchers
researchersandandextension
extension
workers
workers2.
2. Improvement
Improvementofof
seed
distribution
seed distribution
systemsystem3.
3. Cooperation
Cooperation
withwithotherotherorganizationsorganizations
4.
4. DataDatacollection/analys
collection/analys
is/distribution
is/distribution

JICA’s NERICA Dissemination in Africa

Role of Japanese Institutions• JICA¾Trial Cultivation (Expert, Seminar, Training inJapan)¾Seed Multiplication (Expert)• JIRCAS¾Breeding• JAICAF¾Trial Cultivation• SG2000

13¾Trial Cultivation¾Household Improvement¾Exploitation of Farming Materials

Tasks to be Taken•• Accumulation
Accumulation ofof basic
basic data
data andandtransfertransfer ofof cultivation
cultivation
technology
technology areare important
important inin
NERICAdissemination
ineach
NERICA dissemination in each
recipientrecipient countries,
countries, since
since each
each
recipientrecipient country
country has
has deferent
deferentclimate.
climate.

14•• Cultivation
Cultivation trials
trials•• Soil
Soil moisturemoisture content
content•• Temperature
Temperature // Altitude
Altitude•• Fertilizer
Fertilizer Application
Application•• Disease
Disease prevention
prevention- 255 ２５
５International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

VARIETAL TRIAL
NAMULONGE, UGANDA

15Long Term Fertility Trial16- 256 ２
５
６

JICA’s NERICA Dissemination in Africa

Weed control trial

17

Direction of JICA’s NERICA Intervention
20032003Intervention
Interventionthroughthrough
JICA
JICAprojects/experts
projects/experts

20042004Dispatch
DispatchofofNERICANERICAexpertsexperts(WARDA(WARDA&&
Uganda)Uganda)20062006Strengthening
Strengtheningofof
cooperationcooperationwith
withotherotherinstitutes.
institutes.

Cooperation
Cooperation with
with other
other institutions
institutions
Japan
JICA
International
NERICA Expert
9#4&#
Experts in Agric. Proj.
Proj. ,+4%#5(#1,#+%#(
Grant Aid
+44+5)
Volunteers
0'2#&
GVE
Training/Seminar
GVEOther JICA
interventions
18

Strengthening of cooperation with otherinstitutions to achieve TICAD policy- 257 ２５
７International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Activities by countries<Uganda, Guinea>
Interventions in research, vulgarization &seed multiplication to increase existing
NERICA farming field.

<Kenya, Ethiopia, Mali, Gambia>
Interventions to extend variety trials fromresearch institutions to farmers’ fields.

<other counties>
Interventions to strengthen the structure for
NERICA promotion and to promotecultivation trials at national level.
19

Role of NERICA in Rural Dev.
3.Degradation of Envir. 4.Human security

9Promotion of new production9Creation of cash income
in existing farm

2.Food/Nutrition

Unstable natural
9Food Security
condition and production
9Nourishment improvement

1.Ecomony

9Restraint of animport foreign
currency outflow
20

Rural Dev.

1.Sustainable agric. production
2.Sustainable food supply
3.Prpmotion of village w/ vitarity

NERICA dissemination contribute to rural dev.

- 258 ２
５
８

JICA’s NERICA Dissemination in Africa

Contribution of NERICA to farmers
Rural development through NERICA dissemination
ProfitProfitOther
Othercrops
crops

zCash income
good market price than other crops
zStabilization of production
Shorter cultivation period to avoid
natural disasterzMaize:Market price is unstable
zTubers:
low market pricezSorghum , millet
mainly self-consumption

ExampleExample21<Uganda>Area:0.4 ha, Ave. yield:3.5 t/ha,
price:500/kg
9Harvest:3500kg/ha x 0.4ha =1400kg
9Self-comsumption:200kg
9Income:1200kgx500=600,000
9Cost:200,000ăProfit:400,000
Profit:400,000Ğ
Ğ220USD

GDP per capita:300USD
INCOME from NERICA:
220USD

JICA’s Role in General22- 259 ２５
９

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Categories of Japanese ODA
Official Development
Assistance (ODA)

Contributions toInternational
Organizations
Grant Aid
Ministry ofForeign Affairs

Bilateral Donations

Bilateral Loans

Technical
Cooperation
expedite
JICA

JBIC

23

JICA’s Role
• JICA is
responsible for the technical cooperation
aspect of Japan’s ODA programs.
– Technical cooperation is
aimed at the transfer of technology andknowledge that can serve the socioeconomic
development of the developing countries.

24- 260 ２
６
０JICA’s NERICA Dissemination in Africa

JICA’s Expenditure by Sector

FY2003
Total US$1.2billion

Energy 2.6%

Others15.1%

Mining and industry 5.5%

Agriculture,
Public works Human
Forestryand utilities resources
and
16.7%
15.5%
Fisheries
16.1%

Planning
andAdministration
14.0%

Healthandmedicalcare
10.9%

Business and tourism 2.1%
Welfare 1.5%

25

JICA’s Expenditure by Region
FY2003 JICA Total ($1.2Billion)
Pacific 3.3%

EuropeNear and Middle East2.7%
9.9%

Asia
43.0%

America
17.1%

Not
specified
9.9%

Africa14.0%

FY2003 Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries ($207million)
America
24.2%

Asia
42.2%
Pacific 2.3%

Near and Middle East
7.0%

26

- 261 ２
６
１Africa
22.6%
1.3%
0.3%

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8ឋွࣖሉ
3WGUVKQP CPF #PUYGT 5GUUKQPJICA 䛾䜰䝣䝸䜹䛻䛚䛡䜛䝛䝸䜹ᬑཬᨭ᥼
JICA’s NERICA Dissemination in Africaෆᓥ ගᏕ㻌 㻌 Mitsutaka Uchijima⊂❧⾜ᨻἲேᅜ㝿༠ຊᶵᵓ䠄JICA䠅
Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA)
ྖ఍䠖㻌 ᯇᮏ㻌 ဴ⏨㻌 Chair person: Tetsuo Matsumotoྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫᅜ㝿ᩍ⫱༠ຊ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊
Professor, ICCAE, Nagoya Universityᯇᮏ䠄ྖ఍䠅
䛤㉁ၥ䛜䛒䜛䛛䛯䛿䛚㢪䛔䛧䜎䛩䚹㣤ᔱ JICA 䛜 NERICA 䛻ᑐ䛧䛶㠀ᖖ䛻ຊ䜢䛔䜜䛶䛔䜛䛣䛸䛜䜘䛟䜟䛛䜚䜎䛧䛯䚹䛭䛣䛷䚸
NERICA 䛜䜎䛰ᬑཬ䛧䛶䛔䛺䛔䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䛷䛩䛜䚸䛔䛴㡭ᬑཬ䛩䜛䛸䛔䛖䜅䛖䛻ぢ✚䜒䜚䜢䛥䜜䛶䛔䜛䛾䛷䛧䜗䛖䛛䚹䛭䛾䛒䛯䜚䜒䛧䛒䜜䜀䛚㢪䛔䛧䜎䛩䚹䛸⏦䛧䜎䛩䛾䛿䚸
2000 ᖺ䛻᪤䛻䝁䞊䝖䝆䝪䜰䞊䝹䛸䜼䝙䜰䛷䝸䝸䞊䝇䛥䜜䛶䛔䛶䚸䛭䜜䛻ẚ䜉䜛䛸ᑡ䛧㐜䛔Ẽ䛜䛧䛶䛔䜎䛧䛶䚸䛭䛾䛒䛯䜚䛹䛖䛷䛧䜗䛖䛛䚹ෆᓥ 㠀ᖖ䛻㞴䛧䛔䛸䛣䜝䛷䚸䝁䞊䝖䝆䝪䜰䞊䝹䛿ෆᡓ䛾ᙳ㡪䜢㠀ᖖ䛻ཷ䛡䛶䛔䜎䛧䛶䚸䛭䛣䛻 WARDA 䜒ඖ䚻䛿䛒䜚䜎䛧䛯䛾䛷㑊㞴䛩䜛䛣䛸䛻䛺䛳䛶䚸䛭䜜䛷䜎䛯䚸ᙳ㡪䜢ཷ䛡䛶䛔䜛㒊ศ䛜䛒䜛䛣䛸䛿☜䛛䛺䛾䛷䛩䛜䚸䛛䛯䜔䚸䛭䜜䛮䜜䛾ᅜ䛷䛔䛴䜎䛷䛻ఱ䛜㐩ᡂ䛷䛝䜛䛛䜎䛰䜟䛛䜙䛺䛔䛾䛛䚸䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䛿䛒䜛䛛䜒䛧䜜䜎䛫䜣䛜䚸ᡭ᥈䜚䛾ẁ㝵䛻䛒䜚䜎䛩䚹ᙜึ䛿✄స䛾◊✲⪅䚸䛒䜛䛔䛿✄స䛾ᢏ⾡䚸upland 䛷䛩䛽䚹
NERICA 䛾᱂ᇵᢏ⾡䛾䜋䛸䜣䛹䛺䛔≧ែ䛛䜙ጞ䜎䛳䛯䛺䛛䛷䚸䛰䜣䛰䜣䛸ᡭᛂ䛘䛸䛔䛖䛛䚸䛣䛾ᅜ䛻䛿䛣䛖䛔䛖䛸䛣䜝䛷䛣䜜䛜㊊䜚䛺䛟䛶䚸䛒䜛䛔䛿䛣䛖䛔䛖䛩䛩䜑᪉䜢䛩䜛䛸䚸⾲⌧䛿ᝏ䛔䛾䛷䛩䛜㎰ᐙ䛜㣕䜃䛴䛔䛶䛟䜜䜛䛸䛔䛖䛸䛣䜝䛜ศ䛛䛳䛶䛝䛴䛴䛒䜚䜎䛩䛾䛷䚸ከᑡ䛣䜜䜎䛷䛾ຓ㉮䛛䜙䛿ᑡ䛧㏿ᗘ䜢㏿䜑䛶䛔䛡䜛䛛䛸ᛮ䛔䜎䛩䚹᭱⤊ⓗ䛻䛿㎰ᐙ䛜䛹䜜䛠䜙䛔⯆࿡䜢ᣢ䛳䛶䛟䜜䜛䛛䛻ᑾ䛝䜛䛸ᛮ䛔䜎䛩䚹᱂ᇵᢏ⾡䛻㝈䜙䛪䚸䛔䜝䛔䜝䛺ὶ㏻䛾ၥ㢟䜔⢭⡿䛾ၥ㢟䛜䛒䜛䛸ᛮ䛖䛾䛷䛩䛜䚸௒䛿䜎䛰䛭䛣䜎䛷ᡭ䜢䛴䛡䛶䛔䛺䛔䛾䛷䛩䛜䚸䛔䛪䜜䛿ᚲ䛪䛭䛣䛻䜒⠊ᅖ䜢ᗈ䛢䛺䛜䜙ྲྀ䜚⤌䜣䛷⾜䛝䛯䛔䛸ᛮ䛳䛶䛔䜎䛩䚹䛭䛖䛩䜛䛣䛸䛷䚸䛣䜜䜎䛷䜘䜚䛿䝇䝢䞊䝗䜢ከᑡ䛿䛒䛢䜛䛣䛸䛜ฟ᮶䜛䛛䛸ᛮ䛔䜎䛩䚹䛺䛛䛺䛛኱䛝䛺ㄢ㢟䛷䛩䛾䛷䚸䛔䛴䜎䛷䛻䛸䛔䛖䛾䛿䛔䜎䛾䛸䛣䜝⏦䛧ୖ䛢䛵䜙䛔䛸ᛮ䛔䜎䛩䚹㣤ᔱ 䛹䛖䜒䛒䜚䛜䛸䛖䛤䛦䛔䜎䛧䛯䚹- 262 ２
６
２

JICA’s NERICA Dissemination in Africaⱝ᭶ ௒ᅇ䛾➨ 1 ᅇ䛾䜰䝣䝸䜹఍㆟䛜䝍䞁䝄䝙䜰䛾䝎䝷䜶䝇䝃䝷䞊䝮䛷䛒䜚䜎䛧䛶䚸䝔䞊䝬䛿
䇾Beyond the NERICA䇿䛷䛧䛯䚹䛭䜜䛿 WARDA 䛜䛴䛡䜎䛧䛯䚹䜒䛱䜝䜣 JICA 䛸䛧䛶䛿ᨻᗓ䛾ᅜ㝿බ⣙䛜䛒䜚䜎䛩䛾䛷䜔䜙䛺䛡䜜䜀䛺䜙䛺䛔䛾䛷䛩䛜䚸䜔䛿䜚䛔䜎䜰䝣䝸䜹䛷䛿 NERICA 䛿ရ✀䛸䛔䛖䜘䜚䜒✄స䛭䛾䜒䛾䛸䛧䛶㎰ᐙ䛿ᤊ䛘䛶䛔䜛䛸ᛮ䛔䜎䛩䚹䛭䛾䛒䛯䜚䜢⪃䛘䜛䛸䚸⪃䛘᪉䛸䛧䛶ရ✀䛸䛧䛶䛾 NERICA 䛸✄స᣺⯆䛾䝅䞁䝪䝹䛸䛧䛶䛾 NERICA 䛸䛜䛒䛳䛶䚸✄స᣺⯆䛾᪉䛻䜒䛖ᑡ䛧ᯟ⤌䜏䜢ᗈ䛢䛶䜒䛔䛔䛾䛷䛿䛺䛔䛛䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䛷䚸䛭䛖䛔䛖ព࿡䛷 䇾Beyond the NERICA䇿䛸䛔䛖䜘䛖䛺䛣䛸䜢⪃䛘䛶䛚䜙䜜䜎䛩䛛䠛ෆᓥ 䝍䞁䝄䝙䜰䜒ྵ䜑䛶䚸䇾beyond䇿䛻⮳䜛䜎䛷䛾ᇶ┙䛜䛒䜛䛾䛛䛸䛔䛖䛸䛣䜝䛿䚸䛱䜗䛳䛸ಶேⓗ䛻䛿␲ၥ䛜䛒䜛㒊ศ䜒䛒䜛䛾䛷䛩䛜䚸䛯䛰⌧᫬Ⅼ䛷ゝ䛖䛸㝣✄ရ✀䛾୰䛻䛚䛔䛶 NERICA 䛾ရ✀䛜ᣢ䛳䛶䛔䜛䝫䝔䞁䝅䝱䝹䛸䛔䛖䛾䛿Ỵ䛧䛶䜂䛡䜢䛸䛳䛶䛔䛺䛔䛸䛔䛖䛛䚸䜐䛧䜝䛪䛔䜆䜣㧗䛔䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䛿㛫㐪䛔䛺䛟ゝ䛘䜛䛸ᛮ䛳䛶䛔䜎䛩䚹௚䛻䛔䛔䜒䛾䛜ฟ䛶䛟䜜䜀ᙜ↛䚸䛭䛱䜙䛻⛣䛳䛶䛔䛟䛾䛷䛧䜗䛖䛜䚸௒䛾䛸䛣䜝䛿 NERICA 䜢㉳⇿๣䛸䛔䛖䛛䚸䛭䜜䜢୰ᚰ䛸䛧䛶䜔䜛䛾䛜୍␒ྲྀ䜚⤌䜏䛸䛧䛶ⓗ䜢ᚓ䛶䛔䜛䛾䛷䛿䛺䛔䛛䛸ᛮ䛳䛶䛔䜎䛩䚹ᯇᮏ䠄ྖ఍䠅ෆᓥඛ⏕䚸䛒䜚䛜䛸䛖䛤䛦䛔䜎䛧䛯䚹- 263 ２
６
３

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Profileෆᓥ ගᏕ Mitsutaka Uchijima⊂❧⾜ᨻἲேᅜ㝿༠ຊᶵᵓ䠄JICA䠅
㎰ᮧ㛤Ⓨ㒊➨䠏䜾䝹䞊䝥➨䠎䝏䞊䝮䠄୰䞉す㒊䜰䝣䝸䜹ᆅᇦ䠅 ୺ᰝ
Project Management Officer
Central and West Africa Team, Rural Development Department
Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA)
Contact:

Japan International Cooperation Agency (JICA)
Rural Development Department
2-1-1, Yoyogi, Shibuya-ku, Tokyo 151-8558, Japan
Tel: + 81-3-5352-5914
Fax: + 81-3-5352-5326
Email: Uchijima.Mitsutaka@ jica.go.jp

1993 ᖺ໭ᾏ㐨኱Ꮫ኱Ꮫ㝔㎰Ꮫ◊✲⛉ಟኈㄢ⛬ಟ஢䚹1993 ᖺ 4 ᭶䛛䜙 JICA ⟃Ἴᅜ㝿㎰ᴗ䝉䞁䝍䞊䛻䛶ᾏእ㎰ᴗศ㔝◊ಟဨ䛾ཷධ䛻ᚑ஦䚹1995 ᖺ䜘䜚௖ᅜ䛻䛶 1 ᖺ㛫䛾ㄒᏛ␃Ꮫ䜢⤒䛶䚸1996 ᖺ䜘䜚↓ൾ㈨㔠༠ຊᴗົ㒊䛻␗ື䛧䚸䜰䝣䝸䜹䛾ᇶ♏⏕άᨵၿ஦ᴗ䛾ᐇ᪋⟶⌮䜢ᢸᙜ䛧䛯䛾䛱䚸1999 ᖺ䛻䝉䝛䜺䝹஦ົᡤ䜈␗ື䛧䚸䝉䝛䜺䝹ཬ䜃࿘㎶ᅜ䛾ᢏ⾡༠ຊ஦ᴗ䜢ᢸᙜ䚹2002 ᖺ䛻ᖐᅜ䛧䚸⥲ົ㒊⥲ົㄢ䛻䛶 JICA䛾⊂❧⾜ᨻἲே໬䛻ᦠ䜟䜛䚹2005 ᖺ 4 ᭶䜘䜚䚸㎰ᮧ㛤Ⓨ㒊➨ 3 䜾䝹䞊䝥䛻䛶䚸䝃䝤䝃䝝䝷䞉䜰䝣䝸䜹ᆅᇦ䛾㎰ᴗ䞉㎰ᮧ㛤Ⓨ᱌௳䜢ᢸᙜ䛧䚸䜾䝹䞊䝥ෆ䛾䝛䝸䜹ᬑཬ஦ᴗ䜢⥲ᣓ䚸⌧ᅾ䛻⮳䜛䚹

Academic career
Mr. Uchijima graduated from Graduate School of Hokkaido University in 1993.

Professional career
After the graduation, Mr. Uchijima started his professional career as a training officer in Tsukuba
International Agricultural Training Center of JICA, Japan International Cooperation Agency, toprovide training in agricultural fields for trainees from the other countries. Mr. Uchijima hadstudied in France for one year from 1995 to master the language, and transferred to the grant aid
project management department in 1996 and started to work as a project management officer for
implementing grant aid projects providing basic human needs in Africa. In 1999 , Mr. Uchijima
moved to the Senegal office of JICA and served as an assistant to the resident representative andmanaged cooperation projects in Senegal and neighbouring countries for three years. He moved
back to Japan in 2002 and participated in JICA’s structural reform scheme. Since 2005, Mr.
Uchijima has been serving as a project management officer in the rural development department of
JICA, being in charge of NERICA dissemination projects and other rural development projects.

- 264 ２
６
４

NERICA Dissemination Activities in Guinea and Uganda: the Experience of Sasakawa-Global 2000

䜼䝙䜰䛸䜴䜺䞁䝎䛻䛚䛡䜛䝛䝸䜹✄ᬑཬάື䠖➲ᕝ䜾䝻䞊䝞䝹 㻞㻜㻜㻜 䛾⤒㦂䛛䜙㻌
NERICA Dissemination Activities in Guinea and Uganda
The Experience of Sasakawa-Global 2000ఀ⸨㻌 㐨ኵ㻌 㻹㼕㼏㼔㼕㼛㻌㻵㼠㼛㻌➲ᕝ䜰䝣䝸䜹༠఍㻌 㻔㻿㻭㻭㻕㻌 ᮾி஦ົᒁ㻌
Sasakawa Africa Association (SAA), Tokyo Headquarters, Japanせ㻌 㻌 ⣙SAA 䛿䚸䝃䝤䝃䝝䝷䞉䜰䝣䝸䜹ㅖ ᅜ 䛾䚸୺䛻ኳ Ỉ ㎰ ᴗ䜢Ⴀ 䜐ᑠ つ ᶍ ㎰ Ẹ䛾㣗 ⣊ ✐ ≀䛾⏕ ⏘ ᛶ 䛾ྥୖ䜢ᨭ᥼䛩䜛䛯䜑䛻άື䛩䜛ᅜ㝿 NGO 䛷䛒䜛䚹䝥䝻䝆䜵䜽䝖ᑐ㇟ᅜ䛾බඹ䛾◊✲䞉ᬑཬᶵ㛵䜢㏻
䛨䛶䚸SAA 䛿䚸ඃⰋ䛺✐≀⏕⏘ᛶྥୖ䛾䛯䜑䛾ᢏ⾡䛜䛒䜜䜀䚸ᑠつᶍ㎰Ẹ䛿⌧≧䛾㎰⏘ᢏ⾡䛸ẚ䜉䛶䚸㣗⣊✐≀䛾཰㔞䜢 2ࠥ3 ಸ䛻ቑ䜔䛩䛣䛸䛜ྍ⬟䛷䛒䜛䛣䛸䜢♧䛧䛶䛝䛯䚹䛣䛣䛷䛿䚸ᙜ఍䛜䜼䝙䜰䛸䜴䜺䞁䝎䛷⾜䛳䛶䛝䛯 NERICA 䛾ᬑཬάື䛾⤒㦂䜢᳨ド䛧䚸Ꮫ䜣䛰ᩍカ䜢ᑗ᮶䛻ά䛛䛩䛣䛸䛸䛧䛯䛔䚹䜼䝙䜰
NERICA 䛸䛾㛵䜟䜚䛿䚸1998 ᖺ䛛䜙 WARDA 䛾䛂㎰Ẹཧຍᆺရ✀㑅ᢥἲ䛃(PVS)䜈䛾ᨭ᥼䜢䛩䜛䛣䛸䛛䜙ጞ䜎䛳䛯䚹䝥䝻䝆䜵䜽䝖ཧຍ㎰Ẹ䜈䛾ᐇ㝿䛾ᢏ⾡⛣㌿άື䛿 2000 ᖺ䛛䜙䛷䚸2004 ᖺ䜎䛷䛻䚸
0.25ࠥ0.5ha 䛾ᗈ䛥䛾 NERICA ᢏ⾡⛣㌿䛾ᅡሙ䜢 1 ୓⟠௨ୖᐇ᪋䛧䚸㐺㔞䛾᪋⫧䛸㏆௦ⓗ㎰ἲ䜢ᛂ⏝䛩䜛䛣䛸䛻䜘䛳䛶䚸㝣ᆅ᮲௳䛷ᖹᆒ 3.0t/ha 䛾཰㔞䜢ᚓ䛶䛝䛯䚹㎰ᴗ┬䛻䜘䜜䜀䚸1996 ᖺ䛻䛿 30 ୓䝖䞁䛾⡿䛾㍺ධ㔞䛜䛒䛳䛯䛜䚸2004 ᖺ䛻䛿 5 ୓䝖䞁䛻䜎䛷ῶᑡ䛧䛯䛸䛾䛣䛸䛷䛒䜛䚹
SG 2000 䛸䛧䛶䛾άື䛿 2004 ᖺᮎ䛷⤊஢䛧䛯䛜䚸NERICA 䜢୰ᚰ䛸䛧䛯✄䛾ᬑཬάື䜈䛾㒊ศⓗ ᨭ ᥼ 䛿㎰ ᴗ ┬ ෆ 䛾䝸䜶䝌䞁䞉䜸䝣䜱䝇䜢㏻ 䛨䛶⌧ ᅾ 䜒⥆ 䛔䛶䛚䜚䚸UNDP 䜔䜰䝣䝸䜹㛤 Ⓨ 㖟 ⾜ 䛾᥼ຓ䜢ཷ䛡䛶䚸䜼䝙䜰ᨻᗓ䛿 NERICA 䛾ᢏ⾡ᬑཬ䜢඲ᅜ䛷⥆䛡䛶䛔䜛䚹䜴䜺䞁䝎䜴䜺䞁䝎䛿㛗 ᖺ䛻Ώ 䜚䚸඲ ே ཱྀ䜢㣴 䛖䛻༑ ศ 䛺ከ ᙬ 䛺㣗 ⣊䜢⏕ ⏘ 䛧䛶䛝䛯䚹䛧䛛䛧᭱ ㏆䜎䛷䛿䚸ప཰㔞䛸㧗䛔ປാ䝁䝇䝖䛾䛯䜑䚸✄స䛿┒䜣䛷䛺䛟䚸බⓗ䛺㛵ᚰ䜒䛣䛾ᅜ䛷䛿ప䛛䛳䛯䚹
SAA 䛿 2001ࠥ2002 ᖺ䛻䚸䜼䝙䜰䛛䜙ධᡭ䛧䛯ᩘရ✀䛾 NERICA 䛾᱂ᇵヨ㦂䜢⾜䛳䛯䚹䛭䛾ᚋ䚸✄స䛿᱂ᇵ⎔ቃ䛜㐺䛧䛯ᑠつᶍ㎰ᐙ䛾㛫䛻ᛴ㏿䛻ᗈ䜎䛳䛯䚹NERICA 䛿䛣䛾ᅜ䛷䛿 NARIC 3 䛚䜘
䜃 SUPARICA 2 䛾ྡ䛷ὶ㏻䛧䛶䛚䜚䚸SAA 䛾ཧຍ㎰Ẹ䛿Ỉᡂᅵተ᮲௳ୗ䛷ᖹᆒ 4.5t/ha 䛾཰㔞䜢ᚓ䛶䛔䜛䚹
ከ 䛟䛾㎰ Ẹ 䛜Ꮚ ౪ 䛾ᩍ ⫱ ㈝ 䜔⏕ ά ᚲ 㟂 ရ 䛾㉎ ධ 䛾䛯䜑䛾᥮ 㔠 స ≀ 䛸䛧䛶䚸✄ 䜢᱂ ᇵ 䛧䛶䛔䜛䛾䛜䛣䛾ᅜ 䛷䛾≉ ᚩ䛷䛒䜛䚹ᅜ䛾㎰ ᴗ㏆ ௦ ໬ ィ ⏬䠄PMA䠅䛷䛿䚸NERICA 䜢㣗 ⣊ ಖ 㞀䛸ྠ ᫬䛻䚸㞽 ⣽㎰ ᴗ 䛛䜙ᕷ ሙ ᚿ ྥ 䛾⛉ Ꮫ ㎰ ᴗ 䜈䛸ኚ ᥮ 䛥䛫䜛ᡤ ᚓ ๰ ฟ 䛾䛯䜑䛾ᡓ ␎ ✐ ≀ 䛸䛧䛶⢭ ຊ ⓗ 䛻᥎ ዡ 䛧䛶䛔䜛䚹

- 265 ２
６
５

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8䛭䛾௚䛾ᅜ䚻
SAA 䛿䜶䝏䜸䝢䜰䛸䝬䝸䛻䛚䛔䛶䜒 NERICA 䜢ྵ䜐✄䛾◊✲䞉ᬑཬάື䜢ᐇ᪋䛧䛶䛚䜚䚸㝣✄䚸℺₅✄ඹ䛻᭷ᮃ䛺ᡂᯝ䛜ぢ䛘䛶䛔䜛䚹ᩍ㻌 㻌 カ䜼䝙䜰䚸䜴䜺䞁䝎䛾㎰Ẹ䛿䛭䜜䛮䜜⊂⮬䛾㐪䛳䛯⌮⏤䛷 NERICA 䜢㑅ᢥ䛧䛶䛔䜛䚹NERICA 䛻䛿㈋ ᅔ ๐ ῶ䛾ྍ ⬟ ᛶ䛜䛒䜛䚹䛧䛛䛧䝃䝤䝃䝝䝷䞉䜰䝣䝸䜹඲ య 䛾㣗 ⣊ ಖ 㞀 䜢㐩 ᡂ 䛩䜛䛻䛿䚸䝖䜴䝰䝻䝁䝅䚸䝭䝺䝑䝖䚸䝋䝹䜺䝮䚸ᑠ㯏䚸᰿⳯䛺䛹䛾඲䛶䛾✐≀䜢ᨵⰋ䛩䜛ດຊ䛜ᚲせ䛷䛒䜛䚹NERICA 䛸⡿䛰䛡䛷䛿䜰䝣䝸䜹኱㝣䜢㣗䜉䛥䛫䜛䛣䛸䛿䛷䛝䛺䛔䛾䛰䚹- 266 ２
６
６

NERICA Dissemination Activities in Guinea and Uganda: the Experience of Sasakawa-Global 2000

NERICA Dissemination Activities in Guinea and Uganda:
The Experience of Sasakawa-Global 2000
Michio Ito
Administrative and Program Officer
Sasakawa Africa Association (SAA), Tokyo Headquarters, Japan.

Abstract
SAA is an international NGO that assists small-scale farmers in sub-Saharan countries to increase
their staple food crop production mainly under rain-fed conditions. Working with and through publicresearch and extension organisations, SAA proves that, given access to improved crop production
enhancing technology, small-scale farmers are able to double or triple their staple food crop yields
compared to conventional farming practices. Today, our experience in NERICA technology
demonstration in Guinea and Uganda will be elaborated and lessons learnt for the future will be
discussed here.
Guinea: SAA involvement started from 1998 through support of Participatory Varietal Selection(PVS) in association with WARDA. Actual technology transfer demonstration with participating
farmers started from the year 2000 and up to the cropping season of 2004, SAA conducted more than
10,000 NERICA technology demonstration packages (0.25-0.5ha) and obtained average yield of
3.0t/ha with upland condition, applying adequate fertilizers and modern agronomic practice.
According to the national ministry, rice import was down from 300,000MT in 1996 to less than
50,000MT in 2004.
Although the project activities of SG 2000 officially came to a conclusion at the end of 2004, minor
support to NERICA related activities are still continuing through the liaison office at the ministry ofagriculture and such international organizations such as UNDP and AFDB assist the effort of Guinean
government to disseminate NERICA technology throughout the country.
Uganda: Uganda has been producing a wide selection of food enough to feed its populace for many
years. But up to recently, due to low yields and high labour cost, rice farming was not popular andpublic involvement was least in this country. During 2000-2001 cropping season, SAA tested anumber of NERICA varieties imported from Guinea. Since then, rice farming has rapidly spreadamong small-scale farmers where agro-ecological environments were suitable for rice cultivation.
NERICA varieties here are traded in the name of NARIC 3 and SUPARICA 2, and SAA
participating farmers gain average yield of 4.5t/ha under hydromorphic condition.
One notable characteristic of this country is that most farmers grow rice as a cash crop to generate
additional income to pay school fees, purchase household essentials, etc. The country’s Plan forModernization of Agriculture (PMA) vigorously promotes NERICA as a strategic crop for foodsecurity as well as for income generation to transform subsistence one to a market-oriented sciencebased agriculture.
Other countries: SAA is conducting research and extension activities of various rice varieties
including NERICA especially in Ethiopia and Mali. In both upland and irrigated conditions, thepositive result has been visible.
Lessons learnt: Farmers in Guinea and Uganda select NERICA for their own different reasons.
NERICA has potential to alleviate poverty, but to achieve overall food security in Sub-Saharan Africa,
efforts should be made to improve all other major crops such as maize, millet, sorghum, wheat, andtubers. NERICA and rice alone cannot feed the African continent.

- 267 ２
６
７International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8Introduction
Sasakawa Africa Association (SAA) is aninternational NGO for assisting small-scale farmers
in sub-Saharan African countries to increase theirstaple food crop production mainly under rain-fed
conditions. The project is titled as Sasakawa
Global 2000 (SG 2000). SAA/SG 2000 work withand through public research and extension
organisations under the ministry of agriculture in thehost countries.
The main objective is todemonstrate and prove that, given access toimproved crop production enhancing technology
available in sub-Saharan African countries,
small-scale farmers are able to double or triple theirstaple food crop yields by applying adequate inputs
such as improved seed and organic as well as
inorganic fertilizer associated with appropriate farmmanagement practices, compared to conventionalfarming methods. Farmers who participate in the
project must purchase those necessary inputs either
by credit or by cash basis before planting.
Technology demonstration is always conducted in
the farmer’s own field assisted by public extension
workers. Therefore, practicing the technology with
their own hands in their own fields, farmers are able
to recognize the advantages of modern farming
technology and to gain significant economic returnby increasing their yields.
First SG 2000 projects were started in 1986 in
Ghana and Sudan. Up to the year 2006, 15
countries have benefited from the advanced
technology enhancing project.
Recently, as demand and consumption of rice has
been growing in a number of sub-Saharan Africancountries, SAA/SG 2000 has been trying to assist
those countries who need to boost rice production inorder to meet increasing national demands.

GuineaRice is the main staple cereal in this country.
Its consumption of 90-100 kg/person/year is thehighest in West Africa.
According to FAO
statistics,
Guineaisproducingover
700,000~ 800,000 MT of paddy rice a year.
However, it is not enough at all. The country isimporting 200,000~ 300,000 MT annually in order tomeet domestic demand. 65% of rice has beengrown under upland, rain-fed conditions with very
limited use of modern inputs. Traditional methodof “slash and burn” farming has contributed to soil
degradation rapidly as population increases and land
for agriculture becomes less available. Eventually,national average yield obtained is 1.5 t/ha at best.
SG 2000 Guinea started its activities in 1996.
Its involvement in NERICA has started from 1998
cropping season by assisting Participatory Varietal
Selection (PVS) in association with WARDA.
Through PVS, farmers are able to select varieties
they want to plant, and NERICA 1, 2, 3, 4 and 6
were chosen by Guinean farmers. SG 2000 also
helped multiplying NERICA seeds available tofarmers
throughassisting
WARDA’sCommunity-Based Seed Production System (CBSS).
Actual technology demonstration programme
toward rice growing small-scale farmers has started
from 2000 in collaboration with Service National dela Promotion Rurale et de la Vulgarisation (SNPRV),
Guinean national extension organisation. Standard
NERICA technology component recommended by
SG 2000 Guinea through SNPRV extension workers
are as follows:(1) Plot size: 0.25~ 0.5 ha.
(2) Seed rate: 60 kg/ha for drill sowing and 70kg/ha for broadcasting.
(3) Fertilizer rate (kg/ha): N= 40, P2O5= 17,
K2O= 17.
(4) Land preparation: By hand and hand hoe.
(5) Weeding: By hand or if available by herbicide(5lt of thiobencarb+ propanil/ha).
Tables 1 to 4 show the results of NERICA
technology demonstration plots from the year 2000
to 2003. SG 2000 conduced more than 1,000
NERICA technology demonstration packages andparticipating farmers were able to obtain average
yield of 2.0~ 3.0 t/ha with upland condition, applying
adequate amount of fertilizers and modern
agronomic practice. According to the national
ministry of agriculture, Guinea imported 300,000
MT of rice in 1996, but the figure went down to lessthan 50,000 MT in 2004.
In the early 2000s, NERICA seed multiplied in
Guinea was exported to other African countries foron-station and on-farm experiments and made asignificant contribution to speed up NERICA
diffusion in African continent. SG 2000 Guinea
alone exported 14.8 ton of NERICA seed to sevencountries up to 2004.

- 268 ２
６
８

NERICA Dissemination Activities in Guinea and Uganda: the Experience of Sasakawa-Global 2000

The project activities of SG 2000 Guinea has
officially come to a conclusion at the end of 2004.
But minor support to NERICA related activities arestill continuing through the liaison office at theministry of agriculture, and internationalorganisations such as UNDP and African
Development Bank strongly assist the effort ofGuinean government to disseminate NERICA
technology throughout the country.
However, some bottlenecks which prevents thecountry from boosting NERICA production shouldbe mentioned. First of all, soil fertility depletion in
upland area is serious due to “slash and burn”
farming practice.
Although the soil nutrient
recovery is essential to improve productivity,
fertilizer use in Guinea is still too low and the priceis too expensive and not affordable to small-scale
farmers. SG 2000 recommended rotation withsuch legumes as cowpea, soybean and Mucuna(green manure) for soil fertility restoration.
Another problem is that there is no sufficient andupdated statistics without which it is hard to design
effective programme planning. For example, in theyear 2000, the government claimed that about
20,000 farm families planted NERICA in 8,000 haof rice farming areas of the country. But there wasno supporting evidence of this figure. National
statistics are usually unreliable and not readily
available.
Government policy is quite often
inconsistent and overambitious.
In 2002, thegovernment announced that by the year 2005,
300,000 ha of rice farming area which consists ofabout one half of rice cultivating area of the country
shall be covered by NERICAs. Obviously, it has
not been achieved. In spite of being endowed withrich mining, in particular, bauxite, marine and forest
resources, Guinea still depends too much on externalfinancial assistances. Such dependence does nothelp to construct effective coordination and linkage
among all stakeholders because many objectives are
not realized simply due to lack of external financing.
From 1998 to the end of 2004, SG 2000 has
demonstrated that Guinean small-scale farmers caneasily double or triple their NERICA yields, given
access to available inputs. What a single NGO can
do is limited and the further effort of disseminationand expansion of NERICA technology shall be ledby the Guinean government with international andnational partners. Guinea has a great potential, andit must be fully exploited.

UgandaRice is not staple and has long been notimportant in Uganda.
The country has been
producing a wide selection of food enough to feed
its populace for through many years. Uganda has
two crop seasons, a major season from March to
July/August, and a minor one from September toJanuary/February. Subsequently, farmers can growanything they want almost all the year round.
There was no immediate need or incentive to expand
rice farming. However, urbanization and changing
food consumption habits has been increasing riceimport at a pace of 45,000~ 50,000 MT a year, theurgent need to boost domestic rice production arouse.
But local rice production was characterized as low
yield and high labour cost, because little researchattention was paid over a long term of years. For
that reason, rice farming was not attractive andprofitable to small growers up to recent years.
SG 2000 Uganda’s involvement in NERICA has
started in 2000 when NERICAs and other upland
rice varieties developed by WARDA were broughtfrom SG 2000 Guinea. In the same cropping
season, on-station seed multiplication in a 1 ha ofland was carried out. In the following season (first
cropping season of 2001), 4,000 kg of seed was
distributed to 100 farmers in three districts, Iganga,
Tororo, and Jinja, and planted in 16 ha of farmers
fields. Through on-farm trials, NERICA 4 and
WABC 165 demonstrated their potential over local
checks and the further farmer-to-farmer seedmultiplication practice was encouraged. In thesecond cropping season of 2001, 105 farmers
planted two selected WARDA varieties in 48 ha ofplots. As shown in Table 5, average yield of
NERICA 4 was a significant 4.9 t/ha, much higher
than the yields in Guinea.
In 2002, two different institutes, one National
Agricultural Research Organisation (NARO) andanother NASECO, a private seed company, released
new upland rice varieties under two different names- NARO released NARIC 3 and NASECOSUPARICA 2. Names were different, but NARIC
3 and SUPARICA 2 are the same NERICA 4, which
created some confusion among all parties involved
in rice promotion in the country. There could bemany reasons why this confusion happened, mostprobable cause attributed to the result of mixing upof the original breeder seed at the initial stage when
nobody clearly knew the characteristic of NERICA- 269 ２６
９

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8seed. And both public and private sectors were too
impatient and too eager for the hasty release.
However, one should admit that enthusiasm of bothpublic and private sectors made the rapid expansionof NERICA possible in Uganda.
Table 6 presents the yield result as well as
technical details of SG 2000 NERICA
demonstration plots conducted in the first cropping
season in 2003. Within a short period of time,
NERICA 4 has become very popular among thesmall-scale farmers in agro-ecological environments
suitable for the rice cultivation.
One notable characteristic of rice farming in thiscountry is that most farmers grow NERICA andother rice varieties as a cash crop to generate
additional cash income to pay school fees for theirchildren, to purchase household items and essentials,
etc. rather than to use for their own consumption.
Rice is a marketable commodity which creates
income generating opportunity for farmers.
The
national
government’s
Planfor
Modernisation of Agriculture (PMA) vigorously
promotes NERICA as a strategic crop for household
food security as well as for income generation totransform
subsistence
agriculturetoamarket-oriented science based one.

Other Countries
SAA/SG 2000 is conducting research andextension activities of various rice varieties
including NERICA especially in Ethiopia and Mali.
Ethiopia did not have a rice growing culture and it isstill not popular. It is only recently that its
potential to reduce chronic food shortage has beenrecognized and rice has been placed as number four
- after wheat, maize and teff - food security crop forthe next five years, by the government of Ethiopia.
Rice can be prepared as local bread (Injera, Dabo,etc.) mixed with teff and wheat which will create
tremendous market opportunity if well coordinated.
Water management is the key for potential rice area
expansion because the country is blessed with thewide variety of water resources such as lakes andrivers which maintain water most of the year. In

collaboration with national research institutes, SG
2000 has been carrying out a multi-location trial of
NERICA and other rice varieties.
In Mali, first generation of two irrigated
NERICA from WARDA Sahel station in St. Luis,
Senegal performed above average.
WAS
161-B-9-2 with 5708 kg/ha and WAS-197-B-6-3-11
with 5689 kg/ha could do well in the Office duNiger irrigation system after one or two cycles of
selection. SG 2000 Mali will grow both irrigatedand lowland NERICAs and continue the field
dissemination activities.

Way Forward
In many countries of sub-Saharan Africa, rice is
not consumed as a main staple, but traded as amarketable commodity. Many countries are eager
to reduce the import quantity by increasing domestic
rice production. To reduce rice import, securing
quantity is the first priority, but at the same time,quality of the product must be drastically improved.
Market would not appreciate the final product if it isalways contaminated with stones , dusts and otherunidentified objects. Access to the wide market
opportunity will be guaranteed only if the post
harvest treatment of all stages involving threshing,cleaning, drying, milling, and storage is paid muchattention. Centuries-old processing technologies
should be replaced by much improved ones at eachfarming community level.
Importance of rice is rapidly growing in Africa.
But we should not forget the fact that rice is still
new to the majority of African population.
NERICA and rice in general can certainly make agreat contribution for poverty alleviation, but ricealone cannot solve overall food problems in thecontinent. Effort should be made to increase andimprove productivity as well as quality of all othermajor food crops such as maize, millet, sorghum,
wheat, and tubers. Continuous and concerted effort
to improve all major food crops production
technology is very crucial to the poverty alleviationand food self-sufficiency in sub-Saharan Africa.

- 270 ２
７
０NERICA Dissemination Activities in Guinea and Uganda: the Experience of Sasakawa-Global 2000

Table 1

Guinea: NERICA technology demonstration result 2000

Location

Number of PlotsArea Total (ha)Average Yield (t/ha)

Kindia

103

25.75

1.94

1.58-2.10

1.53

Mamou

46

11.50

1.36

1.20-1.88

0.95

Labe

170

42.50

1.64

1.32-1.97

1.16

Faranah

118

29.50

2.09

1.52-2.67

1.13

Kankan

70

17.50

1.89

1.45-2.24

0.95

Boke

126

31.50

2.19

1.66-2.72

1.19

Macenta

168

42.00

2.55

1.92-3.18

1.96

N'zerekore

165

41.25

2.80

1.99-3.50

2.20

Total

966

241.5

2.06

Table 2

Yield Range

Traditional Yield

1.38

Guinea: NERICA technology demonstration result 2001

Location
KindiaNumber of PlotsArea Total (ha)Average Yield (t/ha)

Yield Range

27

6.66

2.70

1.90-3.50

Traditional Yield
NA

Labe

55

13.75

2.50

1.50-4.50

NAFaranah

116

29.00

2.40

1.70-4.80

0.93

Macenta

116

29.00

2.30

2.07-2.54

2.54

N'zerekore

105

26.25

2.46

2.34-2.58

1.08

Total

419

104.66

2.47

Table 3

Guinea: NERICA technology demonstration result 2002

Location

Number of PlotsArea Total (ha)Kindia

82

20.5

2.7

1.9-3.6

Labe

145

36.3

2.0

37,258

Faranah

105

26.3

2.4

1.3-2.8

Macenta

86

21.5

2.2

35,832

418

104.5

2.3

Total

Average Yield (t/ha)

Yield Range

National Average

1.61*Note* National Average of all rice produced.

Table 4

Guinea: NERICA technology demonstration result 2003

Location

Number of PlotsArea Total (ha)Average Yield (t/ha)

Yield Range

N'Zerekore

30

35

2.5

1.5-3.5

Mamou

30

25

2.2

35,552

Labe

50

60

2.7

35,464

Kindia

30

43

3.2

35,553

Faranah

60

70

2.5

35,553

200

233

2.6

Total

*Note* National Average of all rice produced.

- 271 ２
７
１National Average

1.71

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Table 5

Uganda: The result of on-farm trial in the 2001 first cropping season
Location &Variety and Yield (t/ha)(Condition)

NERICA 4

WABC 165

Local Check

6.50

4.60

2.50

4.26

5.00

1.50

3.49

5.00

1.00

4.70

4.80

1.20

5.02

-

-

6.00

3.80

2.00

4.60

3.50

1.80

5.45

4.00

2.20

4.70

4.20

1.95

4.30

3.80

1.00

4.90

4.30

1.68

Busemebatia(lowland)Busemebatia(upland)
Bonkonte(upland)
Bonkonte(hydromorphic)
Bosolwe(hydromorphic)
Namadope(hydromorphic)
Namadope(upland)
Namadope(lowland)
Nagongera(lowland)Paragang(upland)
Average Yield

Table 6
Location

Uganda: NERICA technology demonstration result: 2003 first cropping season
Number of PlotsArea Total (ha)Average Yield (t/ha)

Traditional Yield (t/ha)

Kamuli

13

1.3

2.50

0.70

Luwero

18

1.8

5.22

1.09

Pallisa

34

3.4

4.50

1.92

65

6.5

4.07

1.24

Technology component
Plot size: 0.1ha
Seed rate: 25kg with 30cm x 30cm x 2 (drilling)
Fertilizer rate: Urea 40kg, SSP 26kg, MOP 12kg
Weeding: Hand and/or thiobencarb+propanil (Satunil) 0.5lt/ha- 272 ２
７
２

NERICA Dissemination Activities in Guinea and Uganda: the Experience of Sasakawa-Global 2000

JICA expert and SAA rice director examine
NERICA field in Uganda

NERICA 1 demonstration plot in Guinea, 2004

Irrigated NERICA experiment in Mali

Multi location trial at Ethiopian research station

Rice drying in Guinean village. Vehicles run
on the products.

- 273 ２
７
３International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

NERICA Dissemination Activities in Guinea and Uganda:
The Experience of Sasakawa-Global 2000

Michio Ito, 20 October, 2006

Sasakawa Africa Association

Brief Introduction: What is SAA?
• Staple food crop production enhancing technology
transfer through public extension.
• On-farm demonstration with inputs (seed, fertilizer)
on credit and/or cash basis.
• Demonstration of proven technology available in subSaharan Africa which can dramatically increase theyields of staple food crops.
• From 1986 up to present, 15 countries have benefited.
• Project is called “Sasakawa-Global 2000 (SG 2000).

- 274 ２
７
４

NERICA Dissemination Activities in Guinea and Uganda: the Experience of Sasakawa-Global 2000

Rice in Guinea: Basic Facts and Figures
•
•

•

•

•

Rice is the main staple food.
Consumption 90-100
KG/person/year = Highest
in West Africa.
Producing over
700,000~ 800,000 MT/yearof paddy rice.
Average yield 1.5 t/ha. 65%
produced under rain-fed
upland conditions.
Importing 200,000~ 300,000
MT annually.

SAA/SG 2000 in Guinea: NERICA
activities from 1998 up to the present• Participatory Varietal Selection (PVS) with
WARDA from 1998 cropping season.
• NERICA 1, 2, 3, 4 & 6 selected in Guinea.
• Seed multiplication with SNPRV (public
extension organization) from 2000.
• SG 2000 NERICA technology dissemination
among participating farmers from 2000.
• Collaboration between research andextension.

- 275 ２７
５International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8Standard NERICA technology component
recommended by SG 2000 Guinea
1.
2.

Plot size: 0.25~ 0.5ha
Seed rate: 60kg for drill
sowing, 70kg forbroadcastingFertilizer rate (kg/ha):
N= 17, P2 O5= 17, K2O= 17
Land preparation done byhand and hand hoe
Weeding done by hand or
by herbicide (51 of
thiobencarb+ propanil/ha)

3.
4.
5.

SG 2000 NERICA technology demonstration
Crop year 2000 result
Location

Number of
Plots

Area Total(ha)

Average Yield(t/ha)

Yield
Range

Traditional
Yield

Kindia

103

25.75

1.94

1.58-2.10

1.53

Mamou

46

11.50

1.36

1.20-1.88

0.95

Labe

170

42.50

1.64

1.32-1.97

1.16

Faranah

118

29.50

2.09

1.52-2.67

1.13

Kankan

70

17.50

1.89

1.45-2.24

0.95

Boke

126

31.50

2.19

1.66-2.72

1.19

Macenta

168

42.00

2.55

1.92-3.18

1.96

N'zerekore

165

41.25

2.80

1.99-3.50

2.20

Total

966

241.5

2.06

- 276 ２
７
６

1.38

NERICA Dissemination Activities in Guinea and Uganda: the Experience of Sasakawa-Global 2000

SG 2000 NERICA technology demonstration
Crop year 2001 result

Location

Number of
Plots

Area Total(ha)

Average Yield(t/ha)

Yield
Range

Traditional
Yield

Kindia

27

6.66

2.70

1.90-3.50

NA

Labe

55

13.75

2.50

1.50-4.50

NAFaranah

116

29.00

2.40

1.70-4.80

0.93

Macenta

116

29.00

2.30

2.07-2.54

2.54

N'zerekor
e

105

26.25

2.46

2.34-2.58

1.08

Total

419

104.66

2.47

SG 2000 NERICA technology demonstration
Crop year 2002 result
Number of
Plots

Area Total(ha)

Average Yield(t/ha)

Kindia

82

20.5

2.7

1.9-3.6

Labe

145

36.25

2.0

1-3

Faranah

105

26.25

2.4

1.3-2.8

Macenta

86

21.5

2.2

2-2.7

Total

418

104.5

2.3

Location- 277 ２
７
７

Yield
Range

Traditional
Yield

1.25

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

SG 2000 NERICA technology demonstration
Crop year 2003 result

Location

Number of PlotsArea Total (ha)Average Yield (t/ha)

Yield Range

N'Zerekore

30

35

2.5

1.5-3.5

Mamou

30

25

2.2

1.5-3

Labe

50

60

2.74

1.2-4

Kindia

30

43

3.2

1.5-4

Faranah

60

70

2.5

1.5-4

Total

200

233

2.6

•

•

•

Major Achievements in Guinea
Rice import down from
300,000 MT in 1996 to lessthan 50,000 MT in 2004.
SG 2000 Guinea exported
14.8 tons of NERICA seed
to 7 countries for on-stationand on-farm experiments.
SG 2000 and SNPRV
attracted UNDP and AfDB
support to continue
NERICA diffusion.

- 278 ２
７
８

NERICA Dissemination Activities in Guinea and Uganda: the Experience of Sasakawa-Global 2000

Major Bottlenecks in Guinea
•

•
•

•

Soil fertility depletion in
upland area: Rotation withlegume-cowpea, soybean
and mucuna recommended.
National statistics =unreliable and unavailable.
Lack of politicalcoordination = weak linkage
among all stakeholders.
Great potential, but not
exploited enough.

•

•

•

•

Rice in Uganda: Basic Facts and Figures
Rice is not the main staple.
Little research attention.
However, urbanization andchanging food consumption
habits increases rice import,
50,000/year.
Local production
characterizes as low yieldand high labour costs = notattractive to grow.

- 279 ２７
９International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

SAA/SG 2000 in Uganda: NERICA
involvement from 2000 to the present• Brought NERICA and other upland rice varieties
from SG 2000 Guinea in 2000 cropping season.
• On-farm trial in the same season selected NERICA 4
and WABC 165 as promising in upland, lowland andhydromorphic soils conditions. NERICA 4 gained
4.5 t/ha average yields with adequate fertilizer
application and agronomy practice (drill sowing,
weeding, etc.)• Farmer to farmer seed multiplication spread throughthe country.

SG 2000 NERICA technology demonstration
Crop year 2003
NERICA 4
Location
KamuliLuweroPallisa
Total

Area Total (ha) Average Yield (kg/ha) Traditional Yield (kg/ha)
13
1.3
2,498
700
18
1.8
5,220
1,093
34
3.4
4,500
1,920
65
6.5
4,073
1,238

Number of Plots

Technology for 0.1ha plot
Seed 25 kg with 30cm x 30cm x 2 (drilling)
Urea 40kg, SSP 26kg, MOP 12kg
Hand weeding and/or Satunil (thiobencarb+ propanil) 0.5lt- 280 ２
８
０NERICA Dissemination Activities in Guinea and Uganda: the Experience of Sasakawa-Global 2000

Rice as a marketable commodity in Uganda• Favorable environment-two
crop season/year.
• Farmers grow NERICA(rice) as a cash crop to gain
additional income-school
fees, house repairs, etc.
• GOU promotes NERICA totransform subsistence
agriculture to a market
oriented science based one.
• Plan for Modernisation ofAgriculture (PMA)

Activities in other countries

EthiopiaMali- 281 ２８
１International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Lessons Learnt and the Future• To access market opportunity, improvement of post
harvest treatment is essential• Quantity as well as Quality should be secured.

Lessons Learnt and the Future• For food self-sufficiency and security in sub-SaharanAfrica, all major food crops – maize, millet, sorghum,
wheat, tubers, etc., should be improved.
• NERICA alone cannot feed African continent.

- 282 ２
８
２

NERICA Dissemination Activities in Guinea and Uganda: the Experience of Sasakawa-Global 2000

THANK YOU!!

- 283 ２８
３International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8ឋွࣖሉ
3WGUVKQP CPF #PUYGT 5GUUKQP䜼䝙䜰䛸䜴䜺䞁䝎䛻䛚䛡䜛䝛䝸䜹✄ᬑཬάື
NERICA Dissemination Activities in Guinea and Uganda: the Experience of Sasakawa Global 2000ఀ⸨㻌 㐨ኵ㻌 㻌 Michio Ito➲ᕝ䜰䝣䝸䜹༠఍䠄SAA䠅ᮾி஦ົᒁ
Sasakawa Africa Association (SAA), Tokyo Office, Japanྖ఍䠖㻌 ᯇᮏ㻌 ဴ⏨㻌 Chair person: Tetsuo Matsumotoྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫᅜ㝿ᩍ⫱༠ຊ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊
Professor, ICCAE, Nagoya University

Matsumoto, Chair:
Do you have any questions or comments?

Asanuma:
In Guinea, you had trials of crop rotation using rice and cowpea.
the result? Did you get the results?

How was

Ito:
Since I myself am not an agricultural scientist, I completely depend upon
what our Guinea office supplies to me. So far as I understand, I don’t haveany statistical data on that, however, NERICA with Mucuna, that is green
manure, showed impressing results improving soil fertility. Farmers grow riceand cowpea to sell cowpea for getting cash flow. And, farmers grow rice andsoybean because their families eat soybean. That is consumption for
nutritional reasons. That’s how I understand.

Matsumoto, Chair:
Any others?

Yamauchi:
NERICA 䛻㛵䛩䜛ᵝ䚻䛺ヨ㦂䜢Ⰽ䚻䛺ᅜ䛷⾜䜟䜜䛶䛔䜎䛩䛜䚸୍␒ၥ㢟䛻䛺䛳䛶䛔䜛䛣䛸䚸౛䛘䜀᱂ᇵୖ䛾䛣䛸䛷䜒ఱ䛷䜒⤖ᵓ䛺䛾䛷䛩䛜䚸ၥ㢟Ⅼ䛿ఱ䛰䛸䛚⪃䛘䛷䛧䜗䛖䛛䠛Ito:ᡃ䚻䛿ᐇ㝿䛻ᬑཬ䜔ᐇ㦂䛷 upland rice 䛾 NERICA 䛾䠍䡚䠓䜎䛷䜢䚸ᡃ䚻䛾䝥䝻䝆䜵䜽䝖ᑐ㇟ᅜ䛷Ⰽ䚻ヨ䛧䛶䛔䜎䛩䚹౛䛘䜀䜶䝏䜸䝢䜰䛷䛿䛸䛶䜒ᶆ㧗䛾㧗䛔ᡤ䛜ከ䛔䛾䛷䚸NERICA 䛾୍␒䛾≉ᛶ䛷䛒䜛 early maturity 䛸䛔䛔䜎
䛩䛛䚸90 ᪥㛫䛷཰✭䛷䛝䜛䛸䛔䛖䜘䛖䛺≉ᛶ䛜⌧䜜䛪䛻䚸110 ᪥䛸䛛 120 ᪥䛛䛛䜛䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䛜䛒䜚䜎䛩䚹䛭䛖䛔䛳䛯≉ᛶ䛜⌧䜜䜛ሙྜ䚸௚䛾⡿䜔✄䛸ẚ䜉䛶䜒≉䛻㧗䛔཰㔞䛿ᚓ䜙䜜䛺䛔䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䛜䛒䜚䜎䛩䚹䛹䛣䛾ᅜ䛷䜒 NERICA 䛜ᖸ䜀䛴⪏ᛶ䛷䛒䜛䛸䛛䚸᪩ᮇ䛻཰✭䛷䛝䜛䛸䛔䛖䜘䛖䛺≉ᛶ䛜⌧䜜䜛䜟䛡䛷䛿䛺- 284 ２
８
４

NERICA Dissemination Activities in Guinea and Uganda: the Experience of Sasakawa Global 2000

䛔䛾䛷䚸䛩䜉䛶䛾ᅜ䛷 NERICA 䛰䛡䜢່䜑䜛䛾䛷䛿䛺䛟䚸䛭䜜䛮䜜䛾ᅜ䛻ྜ䛳䛯✄䛾ရ✀䜢່䜑䜛䛾䛜䛔䛔䛾䛷䛿䛺䛔䛛䚸䛸䛔䛖䛣䛸䛜ᣲ䛢䜙䜜䜛䛸ᛮ䛔䜎䛩䚹Yamauchi:䛹䛖䜒䛒䜚䛜䛸䛖䛤䛦䛔䜎䛧䛯䚹

Tokida˖Do you have any view about using urea rather than ammonium sulfate as afertilizer?

Ito:
That completely depends on the availability of fertilizers, and in most of theSouth African countries where we are in operation, they don’t depend on any
fertilizers. Maybe they are grown without fertilizers. The availability offertilizers is the factor we want to recommend.

Participant:Thank you very much for your presentation on your NERICA dissemination
activities. I have a question about perception of farmers in Uganda. You
mentioned the local production characteristics, low yield and high developing costfor farmers growing rice. What makes such costs high? How is the perception of
the farmers?

Ito:
I think that is comparison. In Ghana or Uganda, in their major states, I thinkpeople prefer plantain, banana, and maize. I think, in my limited knowledge,maize and plantain are very easy to grow. But rice, even upland rice, you have to
pay much attention to it, and you have to care for the weeding and so on. You
have to take much care of rice compared to other crops such as maize and plantain.

Matsumoto, Chair:
Nothing else?

Thank you very much, Mr. Ito.

- 285 ２８
５International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

Profileఀ⸨ 㐨ኵ Michio Ito➲ᕝ䜰䝣䝸䜹༠఍䠄SAA䠅ᮾி஦ົᒁ
Administrative and Program Officer
Sasakawa Africa Association, Tokyo Headquarters, Japan
Contact:

Sasakawa Africa Association
1-2-2, Akasaka, Minato-ku, Tokyo 107-0052, Japan
Tel: +81-3-6229-5463
Fax: +81-3-6229-5464
Email: ito@spf.or.jp

1985 ᖺ䚸㛵すᏛ㝔኱ᏛᩥᏛ㒊ⱥᩥᏛ⛉༞ᴗ䚹ྠᖺ䜘䜚 1987 ᖺ䜎䛷䚸䠄♫䠅䜰䝆䜰༠఍䞉䜰䝆䜰཭䛾఍䛻໅ົ䚹୺䛸䛧䛶䝤䝹䜻䝘䝣䜯䝋䛾㎰ᮧ䛷䛾㣧ᩱỈ⏝஭ᡞᘓタ䛾ㄪᩚ஦ᴗ䛻ᚑ஦䚹
1989 ᖺ䚸ⱥᅜ䝬䞁䝏䜵䝇䝍䞊኱Ꮫ኱Ꮫ㝔㛤ⓎᏛ䠄⤒῭䠅ಟኈㄢ⛬ಟ஢䚹1991 ᖺ䜘䜚➲ᕝ䜰䝣䝸䜹༠఍ᮾி஦ົᒁဨ䚹⌧ᅾ䛻⮳䜛䚹➲ᕝ䜾䝻䞊䝞䝹 2000 ㎰ᴗ㛤Ⓨ䝥䝻䝆䜵䜽䝖䛾⟶⌮䞉㐠Ⴀᴗົ䜢ᢸᙜ䚹䛣䜜䜎䛷䝤䝹䜻䝘䝣䜯䝋䚸䝁䞊䝖䝆䝪䜰䞊䝹䚸䝉䝛䜺䝹䚸䝬䝸䚸䜼䝙䜰䚸䜺䞊䝘䚸䝖䞊䝂䚸䝧䝘䞁䚸䝘䜲䝆䜵䝸䜰䚸༡䜰䝣䝸䜹䚸䝰䝄䞁䝡䞊䜽䚸䝬䝷䜴䜱䚸䜶䝏䜸䝢䜰䚸䜿䝙䜰䚸䝍䞁䝄䝙䜰䚸䜴䜺䞁䝎䛻䛶䝥䝻䝆䜵䜽䝖㛵㐃ᴗົ䛻ᚑ஦䛩䜛䚹
2005 ᖺ䜘䜚ᮾி㎰ᴗ኱Ꮫ㠀ᖖ໅ㅮᖌ䠄ᅜ㝿άືᐇ㊶ㄽ䠅䜢ව௵䚹

Academic career
Mr. Michio Ito received his Bachelor’s degree in English literature from Kwansei Gakuin University,
Japan, in 1985, and his Master’s degree in development studies (M.A. Econ) from the University ofManchester, UK.

Professional career
After obtaining his first degree, Mr. Michio Ito joined Japan-Asian Friendship Society, Japan, andmainly engaged in a project for constructing drinking water wells in Burkina Faso. Since 1991, Mr. Ito
has been working for Sasakawa Africa Association in its Tokyo Headquarters and responsible formanagement and coordination of Sasakawa Global 2000, an agricultural development project. Mr. Ito
has often visited many African countries, for project related works, such as Burkina Faso, Cote d’Ivoire,
Senegal, Mali, Guinea, Ghana, Togo, Benin, Nigeria, South Africa, Mozambique, Malawi, Ethiopia,
Kenya, Tanzania, and Uganda. Mr. Ito also has been working as a part-time lecturer for Tokyo
University of Agriculture since 2005 to teach practical analysis of international activities.
Mr. Michio Ito is currently an administrative and program officer for Sasakawa Africa Association(SAA), Tokyo Headquarters.

- 286 ２８６➨䠐❶ ⥲ྜㄽ㆟䇷௒ᚋ䛾㐍䜑᪉䇷
Chapter 4General Discussion

General DiscussionዮӳᛯᜭÜʻࢸƷᡶǊ૾Ü)GPGTCN &KUEWUUKQPྖ఍䠖㻌 ὸ἟㻌 ಟ୍ྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫᅜ㝿ᩍ⫱༠ຊ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊ᩍᤵ
Chair person: Shuichi Asanuma
Professor, ICCAE, Nagoya University
Asanuma, Chair:
We have to finish this place by five o’clock and Professor Takeya has another seminar after
this forum.

I’m sorry but I have to hold this general discussion much shorter than the originalschedule.

Probably, we can just talk about only one issue.

I would like to choose an issue

everybody has mentioned and many participants are considering.
This slide shows the consumption of paddy rice in African countries.
most because of their high population, 127 million people.

Nigeria consumes theThen Madagascar, Cote d’Ivoire,

Senegal, Guinea, Tanzania and Mali.

People in those countries consume rice a lot whenconverted to the per-capita consumption.

It is something like this.

37.8 kilograms per year in

Nigeria, 139 in Madagascar, 90 in Cote d’Ivoire, 107 in Senegal, and so on.
production. The production is not compatible to the consumption.
Japan.

Then, look at theThis is an example, in

You can see here that the rice consumption is decreasing from 1961.

prepared by Dr. Adachi, a post-doctoral fellow of our center.

This slide was

He used FAOSTAT to make thisgraph.
This is the rice production in sub-Sahara African countries.
consumption is much higher than that of the production.

The increase of the

These countries are from the list of

sub-Saharan Africa listed in FAOSTAT: 7 countries in Central Africa, 16 countries in Western
Africa, 10 countries in Eastern Africa, and 12 countries in Southern Africa.
45 countries eat rice.

In total, people inThis is the gap between the production and consumption in Western

Africa, Eastern Africa, Central Africa and Southern Africa.

In all the regions, theconsumptions are increasing, but the production is not reaching to that consumption level.
instance, in Nigeria, Ghana, Cote d’Ivoire and Kenya, there are these gaps.
see these lines, you can see the difference among the countries.

For

Of cause, if you

Going back to Nigeria, thelevel in the vertical line is five to four thousand which is about ten times higher than the other- 289 ２８９International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8countries.

But anyway, the gap between production and consumption is increasing in most of

the countries.
Now, I have given you some background information, to know why we have this open forum
today, and to discuss how we can, I mean, how Japan can help African people to reduce thesegaps.
In the first session, Professor Onyango, Professor Yamauchi, and the other presenters havepresented their researches on rice, particularly on its drought tolerance, and the other threepresenters have talked about their research and experiments.
about “roles of Japan”.

And now we are going to talk

Mr. Uchijima from JICA has summarized the role of Japan or what

Japanese government is doing to help rice promotion in Africa.
from Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan, Mr. Noguchi.

Today, we have a participant

And first of all, I would like to ask

him for some comments about rice promotion in Africa by Ministry of Foreign Affairs of Japan.

Noguchi:Thank you, Professor Asanuma.

I would like to give a brief comment on today’s session.

Agriculture is a core strategy for poverty reduction through economic growth in Africa.
Japan’s approach to agriculture and their development had four pillars.
The first one is improvement of agriculture for activity.
linkage between agriculture and its markets.

The second is enhancement of

The third is capacity development.

The fourthis sustainable development.
Regarding improvement of productivity, NERICA surely has high potential, but the datacollection and statistics on NERICA are not efficient. So, I think Japanese scientists or experts
can play a role in supporting this area through research cooperation.
The second point, the linkage to market is definitely important.

The income generation isimportant unless the products are not sold and the farmers can not generate income.

So,

improving infrastructure for post harvest and marketing is important for income generation.
The third point, capacity development, is an urgent problem.

We should support training

for African scientists, government staff, and extension staff, and we should promote technology
cross-works and build up human resources in African countries.
Regarding sustainable development, we should invest in profitability of NERICA and in
profitable upland/lowland or other crops in each area in African countries.
policy making on promotion of agriculture in each country.

We should support

Regarding this, I think it isimportant to promote rice cultivation and agriculture and the other crop, NERICA.

Finally, I

think it is important to make a success story of NERICA dissemination, so we should consider- 290 ２９０General Discussion

developing collaborations with international institutions, African regional stations, NEPAD, andeach African country’s government.

Thank you.

Asanuma, Chair:Thank you very much.

Mr. Noguchi has talked about how we should increase theagricultural productivity; researches are required to overcome the problem.

Then, theimportance of linkage between agriculture and markets needed for increasing the farmers’
income.

The third point, capacity development, is important, I think.

There are several levelsof capacity development for: researchers, extension workers, government officials andstakeholders, who are involved in agriculture.

The fourth point, sustainable development ofagriculture related to the profitability in rice cultivation.

Mr. Noguchi also said that we need asuccess story to show, maybe Japanese contribution, to the world.

Considering the TICAD

which is scheduled for 2008 in Japan, the success story would be urgently needed.
In today’s forum, we could share information about Japan’s contribution in many aspects ofrice promotion in Africa, not only research aspects but also dissemination activities by JICA
until 2008.

It is rather difficult for me, because of the diversity, to summarize all thepresentations given today.

Therefore, I would like to just focus on “what kind of researchshould be focused or privatized to promote the rice production”.

Before proceeding thediscussion, I think that the concept of Sawah and upland rice given by Dr. Wakatsuki could be
the main issue.

However, Professor Wakatsuki has mentioned in his presentation that if Sawah

could be developed in a place, it is better to develop Sawah system there.

However in otherplaces, he is not opposed to work on upland rice. So, please let me exclude the issue of Sawah
and upland from today’s main issue.
Professor Onyango, who knows best on these issues, has talked about several aspects ofresearch on rice promotion; you can see them in Dr. Onyango’s abstract.

Professor Onyango

has suggested many aspects such as drought tolerance, efficient and effective control of nutrient
usage, and many other aspects and problems.

I would like to ask Dr. Onyango what we shouldovercome or study at first and second, because human resources we have in Japan, who canwork on rice in Africa, is very limited.

So, I think it is better to prioritize the problems to besolved; what is more important, or what should be urgently tackled?

Onyango:Thank you, chair person.

That is a very difficult task but anyway at the end of my abstract,

I had given some of my ideas on what we should tackle first, so as to make us realize theoutcome of this venture.

I know the Japanese Government made a very strong promise to the- 291 ２９１International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

African governments; this was at the World Summit on sustainable development in
Johannesburg, South Africa in the year 2002 that was followed by NEPAD and the involvementin the NERICA production.

I understand that the third TICAD is coming in two years time

and we would like to learn about the success story on the Japanese government contribution in
NERICA production in Africa.

From the contributions presented in this Open Forum it is clearthat there are several aspects of NERICA production, in Africa and all of them are geared
towards sorting out food shortage in Africa.

I think it is only the last presentation by Sasakawa

2000 which mentioned that in case of Uganda, NERICA is actually not being produced to sortout the food problem, it is being produced as a cash crop, and if that is a case it is still acontribution because that will be alleviating the foreign currency balance from the Uganda
government, therefore, we are still in the right direction.
In my prioritization brief, we are talking of the upland conditions of rice production.

If allof us listened to Professor Yamauchi’s presentation then one might have realized that, when wetalk of upland situation, it is soil moisture which keeps fluctuating and we need to arrest it.
Most of us plant scientists are very quick at looking at what is happening above ground which
everyone can observe.

But what happens below ground which is being expressed by the above

ground characters we don’t know, this is where precipitation or water requirement under uplandconditions comes in handy and we need to look at that.

As he suggested, I would not like to go

GMO direction, I would like to go through the conventional breeding if at all we can identify
the markers which code for less water usage and that will definitely be tied to water use
efficiency among the various NERICA.

If we can identify this we will have made more or less

50 % contribution towards promotion of NERICA production in Africa, given the fact thatagro-ecological situation is very fragile. That is my first line, looking at the water requirement
and that will entail looking at below and above ground structures of NERICA varieties.

Oneadvantage we have is that there are several NERICA varieties and it seems that the regions in
Africa have already identified which lines they want to use and therefore those lines should be
investigated for desirable traits.

The other aspect which came out very clearly is the questionof availability of certified seed.

The contribution of double naming of NERICAs’ seeds in

Uganda is real.

There is a variety which is NERICA 4 which one commercial seed firm calls it

Suparica 2 while National Agricultural Research Organization (NARO) also in Uganda calls it
Naric 3.

This creates confusion to farmers.

They are growing same variety but depending on

where they sourced the seed they think the varieties are different.
the seed aspect and harmonize it.
genotype research.
strategy.

Therefore we need to look atThis would ensure seed purity which is very fundamental in

From those two main points, I would like to complement the Sawah

However, there should be some socio-economic activities which prepare farmers at- 292 ２９２General Discussion

the farm level to receive some of the NERICA technology which can complement lack ofgreenhouses.

Otherwise all my presentation strategies remain as presented on the mainpresentation or summarized in the abstract.

Thank you so much.

Asanuma, Chair:Thank you very much, Dr. Onyango. Soil moisture problems are very important, and soseed availability is, for preparedness of the people to receive Sawah system.

I would like you

to ask for some opinions from the floor, but please let me give priority to opinions on research
aspect.

Yamauchi:
I would like to just give a few comments.

I think we need to give priority to the technicalaspects rather than to the social-scientific aspects.

We need to clearly identify thecharacteristics of the ecosystem and we should know how we can control the constraints.
people are talking about problems of drought and water scarcity.

But the scarcity of water is,

in almost all cases, coupled with nutrient deficiency and problem soil.
first time to learn that there is a lowland NERICA.
Kumashiro’s presentation.

To be honest, this is my

I think I’ve just learned that from Dr.

We are talking about the different definitions of lowland, upland,

paddy and so on; that is from the scientific aspect.
constraints are to achieve the goals.
of the research.

Most

So, we really need to identify what the real

I think that’s from technical aspects and that is the priority

Sometimes I’ve talked about something like “drought is related to deep root”,

but it is not always the case.

Maybe deep rooted plant is working well but that is possible

under only a very specific environment.

But in most areas, we need to identify other traits thandeep root for the production of the plant.

That is my comment.

Asanuma, Chair:Thank you very much Professor Yamauchi; we need to clarify or understand the ecosystemand the constraints on the rice promotion.

However to do that, I think Japanese scientists needto go to Africa to work with and help them conducting the experiments, in cooperation with
African counterparts, of course, otherwise it’s difficult to learn from the literature of them.
Maybe rather difficult, but better to go to work and stay on the fields.
to work on the fields.
I can take one more comment from the floor.

Iijima:- 293 ２
９
３It is now the time to goInternational Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8

I also agree with Professor Yamauchi’s comment.

I am working on NERICA for several

years and I think its drought resistance and some other reasons are very important.
went to Guinea this year and met Dr. Sakagami.
grown last year.

And I visited a farm where NERICA was

I asked some of the farmers, “Why don’t you cultivate NERICA this year?”

The farmers told me that NERICA is nice but very difficult to thresh.
that.

However, I

I was shocked to hear

The farmers thought NERICA is nice but not so good for its characteristics whenthreshed.

We should look at other characteristics like threshing capability and some like that.

Asanuma, Chair:Thank you very much.

Since we are discussing not only promotion of NERICA but also

other rice promotion, we should consider your comment.
general discussion now.
promotion in Africa.

However, we have to close thisI apologize we don’t have enough time to discuss more about rice

We hold a mixing party from 5:30, and I hope many participants join it

and continue the discussion.
general discussion now.

Thank you very much for your cooperation.

I have to close theProfessor Takeya, Director of ICCAE, will give us closing remarks.

Professor Takeya, please.

- 294 ２９４General Discussion

General Discussion
Recent Progress in Rice Promotion in
Africa and Role of Japan
1. Trends of rice production andconsumption
2. Research
3. Dissemination
4. Role of Japan㻭㼚㼚㼡㼍㼘㻌㻾㼕㼏㼑㻌㻯㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼍㼚㼐㻌㻼㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼕㼚㻌㻭㼒㼞㼕㼏㼍㼚㻯㼛㼡㼚㼠㼞㼕㼑㼟㻔㻞㻜㻜㻠㻕㻼㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻼㼛㼜㼡㼘㼍㼠㼕㼛㼚㻯㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚㼜㼑㼞㻌㼏㼍㼜㼕㼠㼍㻔㼠㼛㼚㼟㻛㼥㼑㼍㼞㻕 㻔㼠㼛㼚㼟㻛㼥㼑㼍㼞㻕㻔㼙㼕㼘㼘㼕㼛㼚㼟㻕㻔㼗㼓㻛㼥㼑㼍㼞㻕㻺㼕㼓㼑㼞㼕㼍
㻟㻘㻡㻠㻞㻘㻜㻜㻜㻠㻘㻤㻜㻟㻘㻢㻢㻜
㻟㻣㻚㻤
㻝㻞㻣㻚㻝
㻹㼍㼐㼍㼓㼍㼟㼏㼍㼞㻟㻘㻜㻟㻜㻘㻜㻜㻜㻞㻘㻠㻤㻤㻘㻥㻣㻜
㻝㻟㻥㻚㻜
㻝㻣㻚㻥
㻯㼛㼠㼑㻌㼐㻓㻵㼢㼛㼕㼞㼑㻝㻘㻝㻡㻜㻘㻜㻜㻜㻝㻘㻡㻞㻞㻘㻢㻞㻜㻥㻜㻚㻝㻝㻢㻚㻥㻿㼑㼚㼑㼓㼍㼘
㻞㻜㻝㻘㻣㻠㻜
㻝㻘㻝㻜㻢㻘㻜㻡㻜
㻝㻜㻣㻚㻜
㻝㻜㻚㻟
㻳㼡㼕㼚㼑㼍
㻥㻜㻜㻘㻜㻜㻜
㻤㻢㻤㻘㻡㻝㻜
㻝㻜㻜㻚㻤㻤㻚㻢㼀㼍㼚㼦㼍㼚㼕㼍
㻢㻤㻜㻘㻜㻜㻜
㻣㻣㻞㻘㻢㻠㻜
㻞㻜㻚㻡
㻟㻣㻚㻣
㻹㼍㼘㼕
㻣㻝㻤㻘㻜㻥㻜
㻣㻢㻞㻘㻝㻞㻜
㻡㻢㻚㻤
㻝㻟㻚㻠
㻳㼔㼍㼚㼍
㻞㻠㻝㻘㻤㻝㻜
㻣㻝㻢㻘㻟㻜㻜㻟㻟㻚㻡㻞㻝㻚㻠㻯㼍㼙㼑㼞㼛㼛㼚
㻠㻥㻘㻥㻢㻜
㻠㻤㻜㻘㻤㻜㻜
㻞㻥㻚㻡
㻝㻢㻚㻟
㻷㼑㼚㼥㼍
㻠㻥㻘㻟㻜㻜
㻟㻞㻞㻘㻡㻝㻜
㻥㻚㻥㻟㻞㻚㻠㻮㼡㼞㼗㼕㼚㼍㻌㻲㼍㼟㼛㻣㻠㻘㻡㻜㻜
㻞㻥㻤㻘㻟㻤㻜㻞㻞㻚㻟㻝㻟㻚㻠㼁㼓㼍㼚㼐㼍
㻝㻠㻜㻘㻜㻜㻜
㻝㻢㻣㻘㻤㻠㻜
㻢㻚㻟㻞㻢㻚㻣㻹㼍㼘㼍㼣㼕
㻠㻥㻘㻣㻞㻜
㻡㻟㻘㻞㻠㻜
㻠㻚㻟㻝㻞㻚㻟㼆㼍㼙㼎㼕㼍
㻝㻝㻘㻣㻜㻜
㻠㻞㻘㻥㻟㻜
㻟㻚㻥㻝㻜㻚㻥

- 295 ２９５

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8㻭㼚㼚㼡㼍㼘㻌㻾㼕㼏㼑㻌㻯㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼜㼑㼞㻌㼏㼍㼜㼕㼠㼍㻌㼕㼚㻌㻶㼍㼜㼍㼚
㻝㻤㻜
㻝㻢㻜
㻝㻠㻜
㻝㻞㻜

㼗㼓

㻝㻜㻜
㻤㻜
㻢㻜
㻠㻜
㻞㻜
㻜
㻝㻥㻢㻝

㻝㻥㻢㻡

㻝㻥㻣㻜

㻝㻥㻣㻡

㻝㻥㻤㻜

㻝㻥㻤㻡

㻝㻥㻥㻜

㻝㻥㻥㻡

㻞㻜㻜㻜

㻞㻜㻜㻟

㻾㼕㼏㼑㻌㻯㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚
㻞㻡㻜㻜㻜

㻶㼍㼜㼍㼚
㼟㼡㼎㻙㻿㼍㼔㼍㼞㼍㼚㻌㻭㼒㼞㼕㼏㼍㼃㼑㼟㼠㼑㼞㼚㻌㻭㼒㼞㼕㼏㼍㻱㼍㼟㼠㼑㼞㼚㻌㻭㼒㼞㼕㼏㼍㻯㼑㼚㼠㼞㼍㼘㻌㻭㼒㼞㼕㼏㼍㻌㻿㼛㼡㼠㼔㼑㼞㼚㻌㻭㼒㼞㼕㼏㼍

㻝㻡㻜㻜㻜
㻝㻜㻜㻜㻜
㻡㻜㻜㻜
㻜
㻝㻥
㻢㻝
㻝㻥
㻢㻡
㻝㻥
㻣㻜
㻝㻥
㻣㻡
㻝㻥
㻤㻜
㻝㻥
㻤㻡
㻝㻥
㻥㻜
㻝㻥
㻥㻡
㻞㻜
㻜㻜
㻞㻜
㻜㻟

㻝㻜㻜㻜㼠㼛㼚㼚㼑㼟㻞㻜㻜㻜㻜

- 296 ２９６General Discussion㻾㼕㼏㼑㻌㻼㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚
㻝㻤㻜㻜㻜
㻝㻢㻜㻜㻜

㻝㻜㻜㻜㼠㼛㼚㼚㼑㼟

㻝㻠㻜㻜㻜
㻝㻞㻜㻜㻜

㻶㼍㼜㼍㼚
㼟㼡㼎㻙㻿㼍㼔㼍㼞㼍㼚㻌㻭㼒㼞㼕㼏㼍㼃㼑㼟㼠㼑㼞㼚㻌㻭㼒㼞㼕㼏㼍㻱㼍㼟㼠㼑㼞㼚㻌㻭㼒㼞㼕㼏㼍㻯㼑㼚㼠㼞㼍㼘㻌㻭㼒㼞㼕㼏㼍㻌㻿㼛㼡㼠㼔㼑㼞㼚㻌㻭㼒㼞㼕㼏㼍

㻝㻜㻜㻜㻜
㻤㻜㻜㻜
㻢㻜㻜㻜
㻠㻜㻜㻜
㻞㻜㻜㻜
㻝㻥
㻢㻝
㻝㻥
㻢㻡
㻝㻥
㻣㻜
㻝㻥
㻣㻡
㻝㻥
㻤㻜
㻝㻥
㻤㻡
㻝㻥
㻥㻜
㻝㻥
㻥㻡
㻞㻜
㻜㻜
㻞㻜
㻜㻟

㻜

㻾㼕㼏㼑㻌㻼㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼕㼚㼓㻌㻯㼛㼡㼚㼠㼞㼕㼑㼟㻌㼕㼚㻌㻭㼒㼞㼕㼏㼍㻌㼘㼕㼟㼠㼑㼐㻌㼕㼚㻌㼠㼔㼑㻌㻲㻭㻻㻿㼀㻭㼀㻯㼑㼚㼠㼞㼍㼘
㻭㼒㼞㼕㼏㼍
㻔㻣㻕㼃㼑㼟㼠㼑㼞㼚
㻭㼒㼞㼕㼏㼍
㻔㻝㻢㻕㻯㼍㼙㼑㼞㼛㼛㼚
㻯㼑㼚㼠㼞㼍㼘㻌㻭㼒㼞㼕㼏㼍㼚㻌㻾㼑㼜㼡㼎㼘㼕㼏㻯㼔㼍㼐㻰㼑㼙㼛㼏㼞㼍㼠㼕㼏㻌㻾㼑㼜㼡㼎㼘㼕㼏㻌㼛㼒㻌㼠㼔㼑㻌㻯㼛㼚㼓㼛㻳㼍㼎㼛㼚㻾㼑㼜㼡㼎㼘㼕㼏㻌㼛㼒㻌㼠㼔㼑㻌㻯㼛㼚㼓㼛㻿㼍㼛㻌㼀㼛㼙㼑㻌㼍㼚㼐㻌㻼㼞㼕㼚㼏㼕㼜㼑㻮㼑㼚㼕㼚㻮㼡㼞㼗㼕㼚㼍㻌㻲㼍㼟㼛㻯㼍㼜㼑㻌㼂㼑㼞㼐㼑㻯㼛㼠㼑㻌㼐㻓㻵㼢㼛㼕㼞㼑㻳㼍㼙㼎㼕㼍
㻳㼔㼍㼚㼍㻳㼡㼕㼚㼑㼍
㻳㼡㼕㼚㼑㼍㻙㻮㼕㼟㼟㼍㼡㻸㼕㼎㼑㼞㼕㼍
㻹㼍㼘㼕㻹㼍㼡㼞㼕㼠㼍㼚㼕㼍㻺㼕㼓㼑㼞㻺㼕㼓㼑㼞㼕㼍
㻿㼑㼚㼑㼓㼍㼘
㻿㼕㼑㼞㼞㼍㻌㻸㼑㼛㼚㼑㼀㼛㼓㼛- 297 ２９７㻮㼡㼞㼡㼚㼐㼕
㻯㼛㼙㼛㼞㼛㼟
㻰㼖㼕㼎㼛㼡㼠㼕
㻱㼞㼕㼠㼞㼑㼍
㻱㼍㼟㼠㼑㼞㼚㻌㻭㼒㼞㼕㼏㼍 㻱㼠㼔㼕㼛㼜㼕㼍㻌
㻷㼑㼚㼥㼍
㻔㻝㻜㻕
㻾㼣㼍㼚㼐㼍
㻿㼑㼥㼏㼔㼑㼘㼘㼑㼟㼀㼍㼚㼦㼍㼚㼕㼍
㼁㼓㼍㼚㼐㼍
㻭㼚㼓㼛㼘㼍
㻮㼛㼠㼟㼣㼍㼚㼍
㻸㼑㼟㼛㼠㼔㼛
㻹㼍㼐㼍㼓㼍㼟㼏㼍㼞㻿㼛㼡㼠㼔㼑㼞㼚 㻹㼍㼘㼍㼣㼕㻹㼍㼡㼞㼕㼠㼕㼡㼟㻭㼒㼞㼕㼏㼍
㻹㼛㼦㼍㼙㼎㼕㼝㼡㼑㻔㻝㻞㻕㻺㼍㼙㼕㼎㼕㼍
㻿㼛㼡㼠㼔㻌㻭㼒㼞㼕㼏㼍㻿㼣㼍㼦㼕㼘㼍㼚㼐㼆㼍㼙㼎㼕㼍
㼆㼕㼙㼎㼍㼎㼣㼑

International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8㻾㼕㼏㼑㻌㻼㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼍㼚㼐㻌㻯㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼕㼚㻌㼟㼡㼎㻙㻿㼍㼔㼍㼞㼍㼚㻌㻭㼒㼞㼕㼏㼍㻞㻡㻜㻜㻜㻝㻜㻜㻜㼠㼛㼚㼚㼑㼟

㻞㻜㻜㻜㻜
㻝㻡㻜㻜㻜
㻼㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻯㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚

㻝㻜㻜㻜㻜
㻡㻜㻜㻜
㻜

㻝㻥㻢㻝 㻝㻥㻢㻡 㻝㻥㻣㻜 㻝㻥㻣㻡 㻝㻥㻤㻜 㻝㻥㻤㻡 㻝㻥㻥㻜 㻝㻥㻥㻡 㻞㻜㻜㻜 㻞㻜㻜㻟

Rice Production and Consumption Gap in Sub-Saharan Africa㻾㼕㼏㼑㻌㻼㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼍㼚㼐㻌㻯㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼕㼚㻌㻱㼍㼟㼠㼑㼞㼚㻌㻭㼒㼞㼕㼏㼍㻾㼕㼏㼑㻌㻼㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼍㼚㼐㻌㻯㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼕㼚㻌㼃㼑㼟㼠㼑㼞㼚㻌㻭㼒㼞㼕㼏㼍
㻝㻤㻜㻜

㻝㻠㻜㻜㻜

㻝㻢㻜㻜

㻝㻞㻜㻜㻜

㻝㻠㻜㻜

㻤㻜㻜㻜
㻢㻜㻜㻜

㻼㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻯㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚㻝㻜㻜㻜㼠㼛㼚㼚㼑㼟㻝㻜㻜㻜㼠㼛㼚㼚㼑㼟

㻝㻜㻜㻜㻜

㻠㻜㻜㻜

㻝㻜㻜㻜

㻼㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻯㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚

㻤㻜㻜
㻢㻜㻜
㻠㻜㻜

㻞㻜㻜㻜
㻜

㻝㻞㻜㻜

㻞㻜㻜
㻜
㻝㻥㻢㻝 㻝㻥㻢㻡 㻝㻥㻣㻜 㻝㻥㻣㻡 㻝㻥㻤㻜 㻝㻥㻤㻡 㻝㻥㻥㻜 㻝㻥㻥㻡 㻞㻜㻜㻜 㻞㻜㻜㻟㻝㻥㻢㻝 㻝㻥㻢㻡 㻝㻥㻣㻜 㻝㻥㻣㻡 㻝㻥㻤㻜 㻝㻥㻤㻡 㻝㻥㻥㻜 㻝㻥㻥㻡 㻞㻜㻜㻜 㻞㻜㻜㻟㻾㼕㼏㼑㻌㻼㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼍㼚㼐㻌㻯㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼕㼚㻌㻿㼛㼡㼠㼔㼑㼞㼚㻌㻭㼒㼞㼕㼏㼍㻾㼕㼏㼑㻌㻼㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼍㼚㼐㻌㻯㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼕㼚㻌㻯㼑㼚㼠㼞㼍㼘㻌㻭㼒㼞㼕㼏㼍

㻠㻡㻜㻜

㻝㻞㻜㻜

㻠㻜㻜㻜
㻟㻡㻜㻜

㻤㻜㻜
㻼㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻯㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚

㻢㻜㻜
㻠㻜㻜

㻝㻜㻜㻜㼠㼛㼚㼚㼑㼟㻝㻜㻜㻜㼠㼛㼚㼚㼑㼟

㻝㻜㻜㻜

㻟㻜㻜㻜
㻞㻡㻜㻜

㻼㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻯㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚

㻞㻜㻜㻜
㻝㻡㻜㻜
㻝㻜㻜㻜

㻞㻜㻜

㻡㻜㻜
㻜

㻜
㻝㻥㻢㻝 㻝㻥㻢㻡 㻝㻥㻣㻜 㻝㻥㻣㻡 㻝㻥㻤㻜 㻝㻥㻤㻡 㻝㻥㻥㻜 㻝㻥㻥㻡 㻞㻜㻜㻜 㻞㻜㻜㻟

- 298 ２９８㻝㻥㻢㻝 㻝㻥㻢㻡 㻝㻥㻣㻜 㻝㻥㻣㻡 㻝㻥㻤㻜 㻝㻥㻤㻡 㻝㻥㻥㻜 㻝㻥㻥㻡 㻞㻜㻜㻜 㻞㻜㻜㻟

General Discussion㻾㼕㼏㼑㻌㻼㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼍㼚㼐㻌㻯㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼕㼚㻌㻺㼕㼓㼑㼞㼕㼍㻢㻜㻜㻜㻝㻜㻜㻜㼠㼛㼚㼚㼑㼟

㻡㻜㻜㻜
㻠㻜㻜㻜
㻼㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻯㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚

㻟㻜㻜㻜
㻞㻜㻜㻜
㻝㻜㻜㻜
㻜

㻝㻥㻢㻝 㻝㻥㻢㻡 㻝㻥㻣㻜 㻝㻥㻣㻡 㻝㻥㻤㻜 㻝㻥㻤㻡 㻝㻥㻥㻜 㻝㻥㻥㻡 㻞㻜㻜㻜 㻞㻜㻜㻟㻾㼕㼏㼑㻌㻼㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼍㼚㼐㻌㻯㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼕㼚㻌㻳㼔㼍㼚㼍㻤㻜㻜㻣㻜㻜㻝㻜㻜㻜㼠㼛㼚㼚㼑㼟㻢㻜㻜㻡㻜㻜㻼㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻯㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚

㻠㻜㻜
㻟㻜㻜
㻞㻜㻜
㻝㻜㻜
㻜

㻝㻥㻢㻝 㻝㻥㻢㻡 㻝㻥㻣㻜 㻝㻥㻣㻡 㻝㻥㻤㻜 㻝㻥㻤㻡 㻝㻥㻥㻜 㻝㻥㻥㻡 㻞㻜㻜㻜 㻞㻜㻜㻟

- 299 ２９９International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8㻾㼕㼏㼑㻌㻼㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼍㼚㼐㻌㻯㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼕㼚㻌㻯㼛㼠㼑㻌㼐㻓㻵㼢㼛㼕㼞㼑
㻝㻤㻜㻜
㻝㻢㻜㻜

㻝㻜㻜㻜㼠㼛㼚㼚㼑㼟

㻝㻠㻜㻜
㻝㻞㻜㻜
㻝㻜㻜㻜

㻼㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻯㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚

㻤㻜㻜
㻢㻜㻜
㻠㻜㻜
㻞㻜㻜
㻜

㻝㻥㻢㻝 㻝㻥㻢㻡 㻝㻥㻣㻜 㻝㻥㻣㻡 㻝㻥㻤㻜 㻝㻥㻤㻡 㻝㻥㻥㻜 㻝㻥㻥㻡 㻞㻜㻜㻜 㻞㻜㻜㻟㻾㼕㼏㼑㻌㻼㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼍㼚㼐㻌㻯㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼕㼚㻌㻷㼑㼚㼥㼍㻟㻡㻜㻟㻜㻜㻝㻜㻜㻜㼠㼛㼚㼚㼑㼟

㻞㻡㻜
㻞㻜㻜

㻼㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻯㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚

㻝㻡㻜
㻝㻜㻜
㻡㻜
㻜

㻝㻥㻢㻝 㻝㻥㻢㻡 㻝㻥㻣㻜 㻝㻥㻣㻡 㻝㻥㻤㻜 㻝㻥㻤㻡 㻝㻥㻥㻜 㻝㻥㻥㻡 㻞㻜㻜㻜 㻞㻜㻜㻟

- 300 ３００General Discussion㻾㼕㼏㼑㻌㻼㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼍㼚㼐㻌㻯㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼕㼚㻌㼁㼓㼍㼚㼐㼍㻝㻤㻜㻝㻢㻜㻝㻜㻜㻜㼠㼛㼚㼚㼑㼟

㻝㻠㻜
㻝㻞㻜
㻝㻜㻜

㻼㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻯㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚

㻤㻜
㻢㻜
㻠㻜
㻞㻜
㻜

㻝㻥㻢㻝 㻝㻥㻢㻡 㻝㻥㻣㻜 㻝㻥㻣㻡 㻝㻥㻤㻜 㻝㻥㻤㻡 㻝㻥㻥㻜 㻝㻥㻥㻡 㻞㻜㻜㻜 㻞㻜㻜㻟㻾㼕㼏㼑㻌㻼㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼍㼚㼐㻌㻯㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼕㼚㻌㻹㼍㼐㼍㼓㼍㼟㼏㼍㼞㻟㻜㻜㻜㻝㻜㻜㻜㼠㼛㼚㼚㼑㼟

㻞㻡㻜㻜
㻞㻜㻜㻜
㻼㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻯㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚

㻝㻡㻜㻜
㻝㻜㻜㻜
㻡㻜㻜
㻜

㻝㻥㻢㻝 㻝㻥㻢㻡 㻝㻥㻣㻜 㻝㻥㻣㻡 㻝㻥㻤㻜 㻝㻥㻤㻡 㻝㻥㻥㻜 㻝㻥㻥㻡 㻞㻜㻜㻜 㻞㻜㻜㻟- 301 ３０１International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8㻾㼕㼏㼑㻌㻼㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼍㼚㼐㻌㻯㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼕㼚㻌㻯㼍㼙㼑㼞㼛㼛㼚㻢㻜㻜㻝㻜㻜㻜㼠㼛㼚㼚㼑㼟㻡㻜㻜㻠㻜㻜㻼㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻯㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚

㻟㻜㻜
㻞㻜㻜
㻝㻜㻜
㻜

㻝㻥㻢㻝 㻝㻥㻢㻡 㻝㻥㻣㻜 㻝㻥㻣㻡 㻝㻥㻤㻜 㻝㻥㻤㻡 㻝㻥㻥㻜 㻝㻥㻥㻡 㻞㻜㻜㻜 㻞㻜㻜㻟㻾㼕㼏㼑㻌㻼㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼍㼚㼐㻌㻯㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼕㼚㻌㻿㼑㼚㼑㼓㼍㼘
㻝㻠㻜㻜
㻝㻞㻜㻜

㻝㻜㻜㻜㼠㼛㼚㼚㼑㼟

㻝㻜㻜㻜
㻤㻜㻜

㻼㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻯㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚

㻢㻜㻜
㻠㻜㻜
㻞㻜㻜
㻜

㻝㻥㻢㻝 㻝㻥㻢㻡 㻝㻥㻣㻜 㻝㻥㻣㻡 㻝㻥㻤㻜 㻝㻥㻤㻡 㻝㻥㻥㻜 㻝㻥㻥㻡 㻞㻜㻜㻜 㻞㻜㻜㻟- 302 ３０２General Discussion㻾㼕㼏㼑㻌㻼㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼍㼚㼐㻌㻯㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼕㼚㻌㼀㼍㼚㼦㼍㼚㼕㼍
㻝㻜㻜㻜
㻥㻜㻜
㻤㻜㻜

㻝㻜㻜㻜㼠㼛㼚㼚㼑㼟㻣㻜㻜㻢㻜㻜㻼㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻯㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚

㻡㻜㻜
㻠㻜㻜
㻟㻜㻜
㻞㻜㻜
㻝㻜㻜
㻜

㻝㻥㻢㻝 㻝㻥㻢㻡 㻝㻥㻣㻜 㻝㻥㻣㻡 㻝㻥㻤㻜 㻝㻥㻤㻡 㻝㻥㻥㻜 㻝㻥㻥㻡 㻞㻜㻜㻜 㻞㻜㻜㻟㻾㼕㼏㼑㻌㻼㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼍㼚㼐㻌㻯㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼕㼚㻌㻮㼡㼞㼗㼕㼚㼍㻌㻲㼍㼟㼛㻠㻜㻜㻟㻡㻜㻝㻜㻜㻜㼠㼛㼚㼚㼑㼟㻟㻜㻜㻞㻡㻜㻼㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻯㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚

㻞㻜㻜
㻝㻡㻜
㻝㻜㻜
㻡㻜
㻜

㻝㻥㻢㻝 㻝㻥㻢㻡 㻝㻥㻣㻜 㻝㻥㻣㻡 㻝㻥㻤㻜 㻝㻥㻤㻡 㻝㻥㻥㻜 㻝㻥㻥㻡 㻞㻜㻜㻜 㻞㻜㻜㻟- 303 ３０３International Cooperation in Agriculture Volume 8㻾㼕㼏㼑㻌㻼㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼍㼚㼐㻌㻯㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼕㼚㻌㻳㼡㼕㼚㼑㼍
㻝㻞㻜㻜

㻝㻜㻜㻜

㻝㻜㻜㻜㼠㼛㼚㼚㼑㼟㻤㻜㻜㼜㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼏㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚

㻢㻜㻜

㻠㻜㻜

㻞㻜㻜

㻜
㻝㻥㻢㻝

㻝㻥㻢㻡

㻝㻥㻣㻜

㻝㻥㻣㻡

㻝㻥㻤㻜

㻝㻥㻤㻡

㻝㻥㻥㻜

㻝㻥㻥㻡

㻞㻜㻜㻜

㻞㻜㻜㻟

㻾㼕㼏㼑㻌㻼㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼍㼚㼐㻌㻯㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼕㼚㻌㻹㼍㼘㼕
㻝㻞㻜㻜

㻝㻜㻜㻜

㻝㻜㻜㻜㼠㼛㼚㼚㼑㼟㻤㻜㻜㼜㼞㼛㼐㼡㼏㼠㼕㼛㼚㻌㼏㼛㼚㼟㼡㼙㼜㼠㼕㼛㼚

㻢㻜㻜

㻠㻜㻜

㻞㻜㻜

㻜
㻝㻥㻢㻝

㻝㻥㻢㻡

㻝㻥㻣㻜

㻝㻥㻣㻡

㻝㻥㻤㻜

㻝㻥㻤㻡

- 304 ３
０
４

㻝㻥㻥㻜

㻝㻥㻥㻡

㻞㻜㻜㻜

㻞㻜㻜㻟

General Discussion

Profileὸ἟ ಟ୍ Shuichi Asanumaྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫᅜ㝿ᩍ⫱༠ຊ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊ᩍᤵ
Professor, International Cooperation Center for Agricultural Education (ICCAE), Nagoya University
Contact:

International Cooperation Center for Agricultural Education(ICCAE), Nagoya University
Furo-cho, Chikusa-ku, Nagoya 464-8601, Japan
Tel: +81-52-789-4232
Fax: +81-52-789-4222
E-mail: asanumas@agr.nagoya-u.ac.jp

1977 ᖺྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ኱Ꮫ㝔㎰Ꮫ◊✲⛉༤ኈㄢ⛬ಟ஢䚹1979 ᖺ 12 ᭶䛛䜙䝘䜲䝆䜵䝸䜰䛻䛒䜛ᅜ㝿⇕ᖏ㎰
ᴗ◊✲ᡤ(IITA)䛷䝫䝇䝖䝗䜽䝖䝷䝹䝣䜵䝻䞊䛸䛧䛶䝎䜲䝈䛸䜹䜴䝢䞊䛾᰿⢏⳦䛾◊✲䛻ᚑ஦䚹1983 ᖺ䛛䜙஑ᕞᮾᾏ኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫ㒊䛷ᅵተ⫧ᩱᏛ䛾ㅮᖌ䜢໅䜑䛯䛾䛱䚸1986 ᖺ䚸㎰ᯘỈ⏘┬໭ᾏ㐨㎰ᴗヨ㦂ሙ䛻᥇⏝䛥䜜䚸
1993 ᖺ䛻஑ᕞ㎰ᴗヨ㦂ሙ䛻␗ື䚹䛣䛾㛫୍㈏䛧䛶ᅡሙ䛻䛚䛡䜛᰿⢏⳦฼⏝䛾◊✲䛻ᚑ஦䚹1998 ᖺ 6 ᭶䛛䜙ᅜ㝿㎰ᯘỈ⏘ᴗ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊(JIRCAS)䛻໅ົ䚹JIRCAS 䛷䛿ᅜ㝿䝥䝻䝆䜵䜽䝖◊✲䛾ㄪᩚᴗົ䜔◊✲௻⏬ᴗົ䛻ᚑ஦䚹2003 ᖺ 11 ᭶䛛䜙 JIRCAS Ἀ⦖ᨭᡤ㛗䛸䛧䛶◊✲㐠Ⴀ⟶⌮䜢ᢸᙜ䛧䚸ྠ᫬䛻䚸䜹䞁䜻䝒䜾䝸䞊䝙䞁䜾⑓䝥䝻䝆䜵䜽䝖䛾䝸䞊䝎䞊䜢䛴䛸䜑䜛䚹2005 ᖺ 4 ᭶䚸ྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫᅜ㝿ᩍ⫱༠ຊ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊ᩍᤵ䚸⌧ᅾ䛻⮳䜛䚹ᑓ㛛ศ㔝䛿ᅵተ⏕≀Ꮫ䚸㎰Ꮫศ㔝䛻䛚䛡䜛ᅜ㝿༠ຊ◊✲䚹

Academic career
Professor Shuichi Asanuma graduated from Post-Graduate School of Nagoya University in 1977.

Professional career
Professor Shuichi Asanuma started his professional career as a post-doctoral fellow for the International
Institute of Tropical Agriculture (IITA), Nigeria, from 1979 to 1883, working on rhizobium of soybeans
and cowpea. In 1983, he started to work as a lecturer for the faculty of agriculture, Kyushu Tokai
University, Japan. In 1986, Professor Asanuma joined the Ministry of Agriculture, Forestry and Fisheries
of Japan (MAFF), and worked as a soil microbiologist for the National Agricultural Experiment Station of
MAFF, in Hokkaido from 1986 and in Kyusyu from 1993. He was transferred in June 1998 to Japan
International Research Center for Agricultural Sciences (JIRCAS), an organization of MAFF, as theinternational research coordinator and later as the head of research planning section. Professor Asanuma
assumed the Okinawa Subtropical Station of JIRCAS in November 2003 as the director, leading its
research and management, citrus greening disease project particularly. Since April 2005, he has worked
as a professor of International Cooperation Center for Agricultural Education (ICCAE), Nagoya University.
His fields of specialization is soil microbiology and international cooperation study in agricultural areas.

- 305 ３０
５International Cooperation in Agriculture Vol. 8㛢఍䛾㎡ྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫᅜ㝿ᩍ⫱༠ຊ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊➨ 㻣 ᅇ䜸䞊䝥䞁䝣䜷䞊䝷䝮䛿䚸䛄䜰䝣䝸䜹䛻䛚䛡䜛✄స᣺⯆䛾⌧≧䛸௒ᚋ䛾᪥ᮏ䛾ᙺ๭䇷㻺㻱㻾㻵㻯㻭 䛾◊✲䛸ᬑཬ䜢౛䛸䛧䛶䇷䛅䜢኱䝔䞊䝬䛸䛧䛶ᥖ䛢䚸㻞㻜㻜㻢 ᖺ 㻝㻜᭶ 㻞㻜 ᪥䛻㛤ദ䛥䜜䜎䛧䛯䚹ᙜ䝣䜷䞊䝷䝮䛻䛿䚸㻵㻯㻯㻭㻱 䝇䝍䝑䝣䜢ྵ䜑⥲ໃ䠏䠐ྡ䛾ཧຍ⪅䛻䛤ཧຍ䛔䛯䛰䛝䚸⚾⮬㌟䛸䛶䜒ᴦ䛧䛔୍᪥䜢㐣䛤䛥䛫䛶䛔䛯䛰䛝䜎䛧䛯䚹ᇶㄪㅮ₇䚸䛚䜘䜃䚸䠔ྡ䛾ㅮ₇⪅䛾᪉䚻䛻⯆࿡῝䛔䛤ㅮ₇䜢䛔䛯䛰䛝䚸䜎䛯䚸άⓎ䛺㆟ㄽ䜒஺䜟䛥䜜䜎䛧䛯䚹ཝ䛧䛔䝇䜿䝆䝳䞊䝹䛾䛺䛛䚸ពぢ䜢䜒䛳䛸஺䜟䛧䛯䛔䛸䛔䛖䛤ᕼᮃ䛜䛒䛳䛯䛛䜒䛧䜜䜎䛫䜣䚹㻌ᙜ䝣䜷䞊䝷䝮䛜䚸㔜せ䛺㆟ㄽ䜢஺䜟䛩ሙ䛸䛺䛳䛯䛣䛸䛿㛫㐪䛔䛒䜚䜎䛫䜣䚹䜰䝣䝸䜹䛷䛾ேᮦ⫱ᡂ䝥䝻䝆䜵䜽䝖䚸✄స᣺⯆άື䚸䛚䜘䜃ᅜ㝿༠ຊ䛾ᵝ┦䜢ᴫほ䛩䜛䛯䜑䛾ከ䛟䛾᝟ሗ䜢஺᥮䛧䚸ඹ᭷䛩䜛䛣䛸䛜䛷䛝䜎䛧䛯䚹㻌
䜎䛪䚸ᇶㄪㅮ₇䜢䛔䛯䛰䛝䜎䛧䛯䜸䝙䝱䞁䝂ඛ⏕䛻ᚚ♩⏦䛧ୖ䛢䜎䛩䚹䜸䝙䝱䞁䝂ඛ⏕䛾䛤ㅮ₇䛷䛿䚸㻺㻱㻾㻵㻯㻭 䛚䜘䜃௓ධᡓ␎䛻䛴䛔䛶ໟᣓⓗ䛻䛤⤂௓䛔䛯䛰䛝䚸⏕⌮Ꮫⓗ䝟䝷䝯䞊䝍䞊䚸⫱✀䝥䝻䜾䝷䝮䚸⫧ᩱ౑⏝䚸ேᮦ⫱ᡂ➼䛻㛵䛩䜛◊✲䛻䛴䛔䛶䛤Ⓨ⾲䛔䛯䛰䛝䜎䛧䛯䚹㻌ྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ䛾ᒣෆඛ⏕䛻䛿䚸ኚືẼೃ⎔ቃୗ䛻䛚䛡䜛Ỉ䝇䝖䝺䝇⪏ᛶ䛻㛵䜟䜛᰿䛾㔜せ䛺ᙺ๭䛻䛴
䛔䛶Ⓨ⾲䛧䛶䛔䛯䛰䛝䜎䛧䛯䚹స≀◊✲ᡤ䛾▼஭ඛ⏕䛻䛿䚸㐣ཤ䠓䠓ᖺ㛫䛻䛚䛡䜛᪥ᮏ䛷䛾㝣✄⫱✀䛾ᡂᯝ䛻䛴䛔䛶䛚ఛ䛔䛧䜎䛧䛯䚹▼஭ඛ⏕䛾Ⓨ⾲ෆᐜ䛿䚸Ỉ⏣ẚ⋡䛜ప䛔䜰䝣䝸䜹䛷✄స䜢᣺⯆䛩䜛䛻䛒䛯䜚䚸㔜せ䛺᝟ሗ䛸䛺䜚䜎䛩䚹䜿䝙䜰ᅜ❧㎰ᴗ◊✲ᡤ䛾䜸䜿䝏◊✲㒊㛗䛸䜟䛯䛟䛧䛾Ⓨ⾲䛷䛿䚸㻺㻱㻾㻵㻯㻭䜢㎰ᮧ䛻ᬑཬ䛥䛫䜛䛻䛒䛯䛳䛶䛾㔜せ䛺せ⣲䛸䛧䛶䚸㎰Ẹ䛾㛵ᚰᗘ䚸䝖䝺䞊䝙䞁䜾䚸ᩍ⫱䚸㎰Ẹ䛾ᖺ㱋䛸䛔䛳䛯䛣䛸䜢ᣲ䛢䛥䛫䛶䛔䛯䛰䛝䜎䛧䛯䚹㏆␥኱Ꮫ䛾ⱝ᭶ඛ⏕䛾䛤ㅮ₇䛷䛿䚸䛂⥳䛾㠉࿨䜢䜒䛯䜙䛩䛾䛿Ỉ⏣䛷䛒䜛䛃䛸䛾䛤⤖ㄽ䛻ᇶ䛵䛝䚸⥳䛾㠉࿨䜢ᐇ⌧䛩䜛䛯䜑䛻㎰Ẹ⮬㌟䛜Ỉ⏣䝅䝇䝔䝮䜢☜❧䛥䛫䛺䛡䜜䜀䛺䜙䛺䛔䛸䛾䛣䛸䛷䛧䛯䚹䛣䛾䛯䜑㝣✄䛾ඃඛ㡰఩䛿ప䛔䛛䜒▱䜜䜎䛫䜣䛜䚸䛸䜒䛒䜜䚸䜰䝣䝸䜹䛾㎰ᆅ䛻䛔䛛䛻 㻺㻱㻾㻵㻯㻭 䜢ᬑཬ䛥䛫᰿௜䛛䛫䜛䛛䛜኱䛝䛺ၥ㢟䛸䛺䜚䜎䛩䚹㎰ᯘỈ⏘ᨻ⟇◊✲ᡤ䛾Ḉ஭ඛ⏕䛾䛤ㅮ₇䛷䛿䚸ኳỈప‵ᆅ✄స⏕⏘䛾㞟⣙໬䛚䜘䜃⥳䛾㠉࿨䛾ྍ⬟ᛶ䛻䛴䛔䛶䚸ㄪᰝ䝕䞊䝍䛾ศᯒ䛛䜙ぢゎ䜢䛔䛯䛰䛝䜎䛧䛯䚹ኳỈప‵ᆅ✄స䛾Ỉ⟶⌮ᢏ⾡䛻ᢞ㈨䜢⾜䛔䚸᱂ᇵ⪅䛜㠉᪂ᢏ⾡䜢฼⏝䛧䜔䛩䛟䛩䜉䛝䛸䛾Ḉ஭ඛ⏕䛾䛤ពぢ䛷䛧䛯䚹䜎䛯䚸ᕷሙ䜰䜽䝉䝇䛾㔜せᛶ䛻䛴䛔䛶䜒ᣦ᦬䛥䜜䜎䛧䛯䚹㻌㻶㻵㻾㻯㻭㻿 䛾⚄௦ඛ⏕䛻䛿䚸䜰䝣䝸䜹ྥ䛡䝁䝯ရ✀䛾ᨵⰋ䜢⾜䛖 㻶㻵㻾㻯㻭㻿 䛾◊✲άື䛻䛴䛔䛶䛤Ⓨ⾲䛔䛰䛝䜎䛧䛯䚹㻺㻱㻾㻵㻯㻭 䛾஝⇱⪏ᛶ䛿ᅾ᮶ရ✀䛻ẚ䜉䛶ప䛔䛸䛾䛣䛸䛷䛧䛯䚹㻶㻵㻯㻭 䛾ෆᓥඛ⏕䛾䛤ㅮ₇䛿䚸䜰䝣䝸䜹䛻䛚䛡䜛 㻶㻵㻯㻭 䛾 㻺㻱㻾㻵㻯㻭 ᬑཬάື䚸≉䛻䚸᪥ᮏ䛾ᙺ๭䛸䛧䛶䚸ヨ㦂᱂ᇵ䜔✀ᏊቑṪ➼䛾ᢏ⾡༠ຊ䛻ᛂ䛘䜛᪂つ䝥䝻䝆䜵䜽䝖䜢䛤⤂௓䛔䛯䛰䛝䜎䛧䛯䚹➲ᕝ䜰䝣䝸䜹༠఍䛾ఀ⸨ඛ⏕䛻䛿䚸䜼䝙䜰䛸䜴䜺䞁䝎䛻䛚䛡䜛 㻺㻱㻾㻵㻯㻭 ᬑཬάື䜢䛤⤂௓䛔䛯䛰䛝䚸኱䛝䛺㞀ቨ䜢஌䜚㉺䛘䜛䛯䜑䛻䛜䜣䜀䛳䛶䛚䜙䜜䜛ᵝᏊ䜢ఛ䛖䛣䛸䛜䛷䛝䜎䛧䛯䚹㻺㻱㻾㻵㻯㻭 䛰䛡䛷䛿䜰䝣䝸䜹኱㝣䛾㣗ᩱ䜢䛩䜉䛶㈥䛺䛖䛣䛸䛿䛷䛝䛺䛔䛸䛾䛤ᣦ᦬䜒䛔䛯䛰䛝䜎䛧䛯䚹㻌䛣䜜䜙䛾Ⓨ⾲䜔㆟ㄽ䜢㏻䛨䛶䚸㐣ཤ䞉⌧ᅾ䛻䛚䛔䛶䛹䜣䛺䝥䝻䝆䜵䜽䝖䛜ᐇ᪋䛥䜜䛶䛝䛯䛾䛛䚸䜟䛯䛧䛯䛱䛜䛣䜜䛛䜙ྥ䛛䛖䜉䛝᪉ྥ䚸⪃䛘䜛䜉䛝ㄢ㢟䛿ఱ䛛䛻䛴䛔䛶䚸⌮ゎ䛩䜛䛣䛸䛜䛷䛝䜎䛧䛯䚹䜰䝣䝸䜹䛾✄సಁ㐍䛻䛴䛔䛶䚸⏕⏘䞉䜲䞁䝣䝷䞉ேᮦ⫱ᡂ䞉཰┈ᛶ䛾ほⅬ䛛䜙㆟ㄽ䜢஺䜟䛧䚸◊✲ᶵ㛵䛾┦஫༠ຊ䛻䛴- 306 ３
０
６Closing Remarks䛔䛶䜒ពぢ䛜ฟ䛥䜜䜎䛧䛯䚹ᮏ䝣䜷䞊䝷䝮䛷䜒䛯䜜䛯ㅮ₇䛸㆟ㄽ䛾ከ䛟䛿䚸◊✲䜒䛧䛟䛿άື䛻㛵㐃䛩䜛ෆᐜ䛷䛧䛯䚹ᢏ⾡ⓗഃ㠃䞉♫఍⤒῭ⓗഃ㠃䛻↔Ⅼ䜢ᙜ䛶䚸ཧຍ⪅䛾ⓙᵝ䛰䛡䛷䛺䛟䚸䛭䛾௚䛾◊✲⪅䛾᪉䚻䚸ᨻ⟇⟇ᐃ䛻㛵䜟䜛᪉䚻䚸ᑓ㛛ᐙ䚸䛭䛧䛶㎰ᮧ䛾᪉䚻䛻䛸䛳䛶䜒⌮ゎ䛧䜔䛩䛔䜒䛾䛷䛧䛯䚹ᙜ↛䛾䛣䛸䛺䛜䜙䚸䜰䝣䝸䜹䛷䛾✄స᣺⯆䜢 㻺㻱㻾㻵㻯㻭 䛾䜏䛻㝈䜙䛪䚸䜘䜚඲యⓗ䛻⪃䛘䜛䜉䛝䛸䛾ពぢ䜒ฟ䛥䜜䜎䛧䛯䚹㻌⚾䛾༳㇟䛸䛧䜎䛧䛶䛿䚸㻺㻱㻾㻵㻯㻭 䛾◊✲䛸ᬑཬ䛻㛵䛩䜛᝟ሗ䛸䝕䞊䝍䜢ྍ⬟䛺㝈䜚ከ䛟⵳✚䛩䜛䛣䛸䛷䚸䜘䜚ຠ⋡ⓗ䛻άື䛷䛝䜛䜘䛖䛻䛺䜚䚸༠ຊάື䛾㍯䜒ᗈ䛜䜛䛸⪃䛘䜎䛩䚹䜘䜚ᙉᅛ䛷Ᏻᐃ䛧䛯⤌⧊ⓗ༠ຊయไ䜢⠏䛔䛶䛔䛛䛺䛡䜜䜀䛺䜚䜎䛫䜣䚹㻌᭱ᚋ䛻䚸ᙜ䝣䜷䞊䝷䝮䛻䛤ཧຍ䛔䛯䛰䛝䜎䛧䛯ⓙᵝ䛾✚ᴟⓗ䛺ጼໃ䛻䚸㔜䛽䛶ឤㅰ⏦䛧ୖ䛢䜎䛩䚹㻵㻯㻯㻭㻱 䝇䝍䝑䝣୍ྠ䚸ᙜ䝣䜷䞊䝷䝮䛛䜙ᚓ䛯▱ぢ䛸ᒎᮃ䜢䜒䛸䛻௒ᚋ䛸䜒ດຊ䛧䛶䛔䛟ᡤᏑ䛷䛤䛦䛔䜎䛩䚹㻌㻵㻯㻯㻭㻱 䜢௦⾲䛧䚸ᚰ䜘䜚ⓙᵝ䛻ᚚ♩䜢⏦䛧ୖ䛢䜎䛩䚹㻌ྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫᅜ㝿ᩍ⫱༠ຊ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊㛗䠄㻞㻜㻜㻢 ᖺ 㻝㻜 ᭶ᙜ᫬䠅㻌➉㇂ ⿱அ- 307 ３０
７International Cooperation in Agriculture Vol. 8

Closing Remarks
First of all, let us express my sincere gratitude to all the participants for a nice day in the Seventh
ICCAE Open Forum on 20th October, 2006.

With the big theme of ‘‘Recent progress in rice promotion in

Africa and role of Japan, NERICA as an example of research and dissemination”, thirty-four participants
including ICCAE staff joined this forum.

It was a great honour to us to have the attractive keynote

address and eight presentations, as well as impressive discussions in the forum.

The participants might

have liked to express their comments more on the issues; we are sorry for holding the forum on a tightschedule.
We undoubtedly had impressive and significant discussions.

We exchanged and shared a great deal of

information and views on rice promotion activities and international cooperation including capacity
building projects implemented in Africa.
Thanks to Professor Onyango for his keynote address which gives us comprehensive views about
NERICA and intervention strategies for it, including research on physiological parameters, breeding
program, fertilizer usage, and capacity building.
Professor Yamauchi showed us important roles of roots in relation to water stress tolerance underfluctuating weather condition.

Chief researcher Ishii from National Institute of Crop Science showed us

achievements of upland rice breeding of past 77 years in Japan.

The information and knowledge he gave

us could be extremely valuable when we consider rice promotion in Africa where the sawah ratio is nothigh.

In my presentation with Mr. Okech from KARI-Kibos, Kenya, I talked about the factors of training,education, their interest, and young farmers which could be important when we disseminate NERICA to
the villagers.

Professor Wakatsuki from Kinki University did conclude his presentation as “no sawah, nogreen revolution”.

He suggested that the farmers should establish the sawah system for realizing theirgreen revolution.

It is supposed that, based on his conclusion, we would give lower priority to upland ricebased on his conclusion,. A big question we have here is; how we could disseminate and fix NERICA tofarmland in Africa.

Dr. Sakurai from Policy Research Institute talked about intensification of rainfed

lowland rice production and potential green revolution using a great deal of analysis and filed survey data.
Dr. Sakurai concluded that investment in water control technologies for rainfed lowland would lead
wealthy cultivators to use innovative technologies.

Additionally he pointed out that the market access isimportant as a constraint.
Director Kumashiro from JIRCAS introduced the research activities implemented by JIRCAS, for
improving rice varieties for Africa.

He also mentioned the relatively low drought tolerance of NERICA

compared with the local varieties.

Mr. Uchijima, Project Management Officer of JICA, presented JICA’s

NERICA dissemination in Africa, and introduced their new projects implemented as a role of Japan, aimed
at technical cooperation for trial cultivation, seed multiplication, and some like that.

The program officer

of SAA, Mr. Ito introduced impressive SAA’s NERICA dissemination activities in Guniea and Uganda;- 308 ３０
８Closing Remarks

they are overcoming the big bottlenecks. He also pointed out that NERICA alone cannot feed the African
continent.
Through all the presentations and discussions, we could understand where we are coming to and whatissues we should think about, considering what projects we have implemented so far, and what are ongoing.
Rice promotion in Africa was discussed from some points of view: productivity, infrastructure, capacity
development and profitability, and institutional cooperation.

The presentations and discussions we had in

the forum included research-oriented or activity-oriented issues, focusing on technological andsocioeconomic aspects.

They are extremely understandable not only for us but also for researchers, policy

makers, experts, even villagers.

Of course, some participants pointed out that we should think about ricepromotion from a holistic point of view so as to consider NERICA included in the way.
I have an impression that, if we can accumulate information and data concerning research anddissemination of NERICA as much as possible, we can work on it effectively and collaboratively more.
We should establish strong and stable relations each other, that is, we should promote our cooperation so as
to implement them in a further systematic way.
It is my greatest pleasure to have had this forum, appreciating all of the participants for creatively
joining it.

I believe, through the forum, the ICCAE staff must find what we can do from now on.

Onbehalf of the ICCAE staff, I would like to express my sincere appreciation for your creative participation.
Again, thank you very much for your kind cooperation for the Seventh ICCAE Open Forum.

Hiroyuki Takeya
Director
International Cooperation Center for Agricultural Education (ICCAE)
Nagoya University, Japan(as of October 2006)- 309 ３０９International Cooperation in Agriculture Vol. 8⦅㞟ᚋグ䜎䛪䚸⚾䛹䜒䛾ᛰ៏䛾䛯䜑䚸䝥䝻䝅䞊䝕䜱䞁䜾䛾ห⾜䛜 3 ᖺ䜒㐜䜜䛶䛧䜎䛔䜎䛧䛯䛣䛸䜢ᚰ䜘䜚䛚ル䜃⏦䛧ୖ䛢䜎䛩䚹䛤ᢎ▱䛾䜘䛖䛻䚸䛣䛾㛫䛾䝛䝸䜹䜢ᕠ䜛஦᝟䛰䛡䛷䛺䛟䚸2008 ᖺ 5 ᭶䛻ᶓ὾䛷㛤ദ䛥䜜䛯➨ 4 ᅇ䜰䝣䝸䜹㛤Ⓨ఍㆟(TICAD IV)䜢ዎᶵ䛸䛧䛶䚸䜰䝣䝸䜹✄స᣺⯆䛻ྥ䛡䛯ᙉ䛔㢼䛜྿䛝ฟ䛧䛯䛣䛸䛺䛹䚸࿘䜚䛾≧ἣ䛿኱䛝䛟ኚ໬䛧䛶䛔䜎䛩䚹
3 ᖺ๓䛾䜸䞊䝥䞁䝣䜷䞊䝷䝮䛷䛿䚸䜿䝙䜰䛾䝛䝸䜹᱂ᇵヨ㦂䚸᪥ᮏ䛾㝣✄⫱✀䛾Ṕྐ䚸ᅜ㝿◊✲༠ຊᶵ㛵䛾䜰䝣䝸䜹✄స䛾◊✲䚸Sawah 䝅䝇䝔䝮䛾ᬑཬ䚸✄స䞉⡿㈍኎䜢ᕠ䜛㎰ᮧ♫఍⤒῭᮲௳䚸䛭䜜䛛䜙 JICA 䛾ྲྀ䜚⤌䜏䛺䛹䚸௒䛷䜒ព࿡䛜䛒䜛䛸ᛮ䜟䜜䜛኱஦䛺Ⓨ⾲䛜䛒䜚䜎䛧䛯䛾䛷䚸ห⾜≀䛸䛧䛶䜎䛸䜑䛶䛚䛟䛣䛸䛿኱䛝䛺ព⩏䛜䛒䜛䛸⪃䛘䛶䛔䜎䛩䚹䠏ᖺ๓䛾䜸䝥䞁䝣䜷䞊䝷䝮䛻䜒㛵䜟䜙䛪䚸䛤ㅮ₇䛧䛶䛔䛯䛰䛝䜎䛧䛯ඛ⏕᪉䛻䛿䛤ከᛁ䛾䛺䛛㈗㔜
䛺䛚᫬㛫䜢䛥䛔䛶䛔䛯䛰䛝䚸ᰯṇ䜢ᘬ䛝ཷ䛡䛶䛟䛰䛥䛔䜎䛧䛯䛣䛸䜢㔜䛽䛶ឤㅰ⏦䛧ୖ䛢䜎䛩䚹ᮏ䝥䝻䝅䞊䝕䜱䞁䜾䛜㛵ಀ⪅䛾ⓙᵝ䛾䛚ᙺ䛻❧䛴䛣䛸䛜䛤䛦䛔䜎䛩䛸ᮃእ䛾႐䜃䛷䛤䛦䛔䜎䛩䚹䜏䛺䛥䜎䛛䜙䛔䛯䛰䛝䜎䛧䛯䜰䝗䝞䜲䝇䜢⣊䛸䛧䚸௒ᚋ䛸䜒ⓙᵝ䛾䛚ᙺ䛻❧䛶䜎䛩䜘䛖䜸䞊䝥䞁䝣䜷䞊䝷䝮䛾௻⏬䜔䛭䛾グ㘓䛾⦅㞟ᴗົ䛻⢭㐍䛧䛶䜎䛔䜛ᡤᏑ䛷䛤䛦䛔䜎䛩䚹⦅㞟ᢸᙜྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫᅜ㝿ᩍ⫱༠ຊ◊✲䝉䞁䝍䞊

312
３
１
０

Editor’s Postscript

Editor’s Postscript
First of all, we have to apologize the three years delay of this publication for proceedings of theSeventh ICCAE Open Forum.
As you know, a strong wind favorable for rice dissemination in Africa has been blowing since the
Fourth Tokyo International Conference on African Development (TICAD IV) held in Yokohama,Japan, in May 2008.

The circumstances surrounding NERICA have also dramatically changed.

The Seventh ICCAE Open Forum was held three years ago, in 2006, and yet the presentations givenin the place are still extremely significant: cultivation trials in Kenya, history of upland rice
breeding in Japan, research by international research collaboration institutes on rice cultivation in
Africa, dissemination of Sawah system, socioeconomic factors in the rural areas in cultivation andmarketing of rice in Africa, activities implemented by JICA, and many other important topics.
We would like to appreciate the speakers for their sharing the time in proofreading and in giving us
many pieces of advice, in spite of the time lag of three years.

The experience we have obtained

through the editorial work will be a great help for our future ICCAE activities.
It is a greatest pleasure if this publication of these significant proceedings will be a help to thosewhom concerned.

EditorSecretariat,
International Cooperation Center for Agricultural Education (ICCAE)
Nagoya University

313
３
１
１

㎰Ꮫᅜ㝿༠ຊ ➨㸶ྕ2010 ᖺ㸰᭶Ⓨ⾜⦅㞟࣭Ⓨ⾜㸸ྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫ㎰Ꮫᅜ㝿ᩍ⫱༠ຊ◊✲ࢭࣥࢱ࣮
ࠛ464-8601 ྡྂᒇᕷ༓✀༊୙⪁⏫
㟁ヰ㸸㸦052㸧789-4225  Fax:㸦052㸧789-4222
༳ๅ㸸ྡྂᒇ኱Ꮫᾘ㈝⏕άඹྠ⤌ྜ༳ๅ㒊

International Cooperation in Agriculture
Volume 8
Issued in: February, 2010
Edited and issued by:International Cooperation Center for Agricultural Education (ICCAE)
Nagoya University
Address: 464-8601 Chikusa-ku, Nagoya City, Japan
Phone: 052-789-4225 Fax: 052-789-4222
Printed by: Nagoya University Co-op.

農学国際協力
Volume 8

名古屋大学農学国際教育協力研究センター

二〇一〇年二月